on 


°B 13 7b? 


ne 


Ne: 
We 


Sing 


> μ᾿ = en ~ 


| as“ DIODORUS 


THE PELOPONNESIAN WAR. 


A DISSERTATION : 


PRESENTED TO THE BOARD OF UNIVERSITY STUDIES OF 
THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY FOR THE | 
DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY ~ 


BY 


EDWIN L [oxeex, 


PROFESSOR OF GREEK IN CENTRA UNIVERSITY, RICHMOND, KY. 


“BALTIMORE: eee 
JOHN MURPHY & co. 
1899. ' 


DIODORUS 


AND 


THE PELOPONNESIAN WAR. 


A DISSERTATION 


PRESENTED TO THE BOARD OF UNIVERSITY STUDIES OF 
THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY FOR THE 
DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY 


BY 


EDWIN L. GREEN, 


PROFESSOR OF GREEK IN CENTRAL UNIVERSITY, RICHMOND, KY. 


ι] 
Η᾿ ᾿ 
δι Ἀφ 800 


BALTIMORE: 
JOHN MURPHY & CQ. 
1809. 


CONTENTS. 


INTRODUCTION, - - - - - = - 


GENERAL StuDy or LANGUAGE OF DIODORUS: 
Word-formation, - - - - - 
OST GSES AR operat Chelan ore aia τος 
General Observations, - - -— - 
Prepositions, - - - - - - 
APOE τ το Π πὶ νι ea ο 
Rhythm and Figures, Biot tai ts SI 


PELOPONNESIAN WAR: 
General Examination, - - -Ἕ - 
ROUNOGR, = a ee ie 


GONGLOSION, -  - = = sss 


2904827 


8 


Φ 


the 


Ig 


D 


‘ue Veet 


DIODORUS AND THE PELOPONNESIAN WAR. 


Diodorus, known as the Sicilian, was born in Agyrium, a city 
_of Sicily (i 4, 4), in the early part of the first century preceding 
our era. Under Augustus he completed an universal history in 
forty books, to which he gave the name Βιβλιοθήκη ᾿Ἰστορική. 
This ‘ Historical Library ’—for such it is—comprises the history 
of the world from mythical times to the year 60/59 B. C., and 
according to our author, it required the work of thirty years, the 
ransacking of Rome’s great libraries, and journeys to Egypt and 
over much of Europe and Asia. His conception of history is 
excellent, and the breadth of his work is greater than that of 
any of his predecessors, inasmuch as it embraces also the history 
of Rome, L. Ὁ. Brocker, Mod. Quellenforsch. u. ant. Geschicht- 
schreiber, Innsbruck, 1882, p. 63. But the result does not justify 
the expectation. According to the great majority of investigators, 
Diodorus is nothing more than an excerptor, a sorry one at that: 
G. F. Unger, Diodors Quellen i. d. Diadochengeschichte, 1878, 
p- 370; F. L. Schoenle, Diodorstudien, Berlin, 1891, p. 1; C. 
Wachsmuth, Alte Geschichte, 95. H. Nissen is of the opinion 
that Diodorus shortened his sources, while he transferred their 
language into that of his own day, Krit. Untersuch. ti. d. Quellen 
d. 4. u. 5. Dekade d. Livius, 110-113. Investigators state that 
Diodorus uses only one source for the events of any period, 
though they are agreed that this is always a good one, and that 
he endeavors to secure a contemporary writer of the time, Unger, 
1. ο.; J. Pohler, Diod. als Quel. z. Gesch. v. Hellas i. εἰ. Zeit. v. 
Thebens Aufschwung, Cassel, 1885, p. 11; Wachsmuth, 1]. ὁ. 
Diodorus has been for many years a favorite with makers of 
dissertations, and his sources have in consequence been very 
thoroughly sifted. The pamphlet of C. A. Volquardsen, Unter- 
such. ἃ. d. Quel. d. gr. u. sicil. Gesch. ὃ. Diod., B. xi bis xvi, 
Kiel, 1868, has had great influence in determining the method of 
5 


6 2... νυ Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 


investigation of others and their results. There is little dissent 
from the almost universal contempt for Diodorus. Voices of | 
protest have been raised by Brécker, 1. c.; R. Neubert, Spuren ~ 
selbstdndiger Thétigkeit ὃ. Diodor, Bautzen, 1890; A. Holm, Gesch. 
Siciliens, ii 360 (though he has since changed πῇ views, Hist. of 
Greece, Eng. trans., 11 101); E. A. Freeman, Hist. of Sicily, ii 
162 N.1; iii 1 N. 1. C.G. Heyne, at the close of last century, 
believed that the writers named from time to time were authorities 
for the preceding period, De Fontibus et Auctoribus Historiarum 
Diodori (in Dindorf edit.). He is followed in the main by G. 
Grote. 

/ As far as concerns the Peloponnesian War, the opinion of 
Volquardsen has prevailed, that Diodorus drew his narrative from 
Ephorus and Timaeus: Wachsmuth, 1. ¢., 101; G. Busolt, Gr. 
Gesch., ii 105-6; L. Holzapfel, Untersuch. ti. d. Darstell. d. gr. 
Gesch., Leipzig, 1879, pp. 18, 41; W. Collmann, De Diodori Sie. 
Fontibus, Marburgi, 1869. Holm, Hist. of ΟὟ., Eng. tr., ii 508, 
follows Breitenbach and assigns the latter part of the narrative, 
xiii 45-107, to Theopompus. Freeman can see no reason why 
Philistus and Thucydides were not used as well as Ephorus and 
Timaeus. To this last historian belong the speeches of xili 20-32, 
if we assent to the generally accepted view of E. Bachof, Timaios 
als Quelle Diod. f. ἃ. Red. 7. B. 18 u. 14, Jahrb. 129, 445-478. 
Some investigators, as M. Biidinger, D. Univ. Hist. i. Alterth., 
p. 159, find here and there excerpts from Thucydides. 

The many investigations of the sources of Diodorus have been 
based on his subject-matter. Only in a fitful way has use been 
made of his language. ‘The most extensive employment of it for 
determining his sources is that of W. Stern, who endeavors to 
show that the first twenty books of Diodorus were derived from 
Theopompus, Theopompos: Hine Hauptquelle εἰ. Diod. B. i-xx, in 
Comm. i. hon. G. Studemund, 1889, 145-162; Diodor u. Theo- 
pomp, Durlach, 1891. The object of this paper was primarily to 
examine Diodorus’ language, for the purpose of finding whether it 
could be a means of determining his sources; and the narrative of 
the Peloponnesian War was selected for the investigation. As a 
direct linguistic comparison with Thucydides and the fragments of 
Philistus, Ephorus and Timaeus (C. Miller, Frg. Hist. Gr. I 
18:08) yielded few certain results, it was deemed best to -substi- 


Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 7 


tute for it a general study of the language, though the symmetry 
Ἷ of the paper would be marred. Inasmuch as the bulk of Diodorus 
is such that it was impracticable to examine its entirety, the study 


ss 
ee - 


was confined to the second ‘book, the first irst thirty-four chapters of 

which come from Ktesias, Wachsmuth, I. c.; Krumbholz, Rhein. 

* Mus., x] 321-341; to the eleventh, twelfth aud thirteenth books, 
whose Greek and Sicilian history is by the majority of investiga- 
tors assigned to Ephorus and Timaeus, Volquardsen, |. ¢., p. 118; 
Wachsmuth, 1. ¢.; and to the eighteenth book, which is supposed 
to have its origin in Hieronymus of Kardia, Droysen, Hermes, xi 
464; Wachsmuth, 1. c. There seems in this selection to be a 
sufficient variety in the sources as far as concerns any reflection of 
their language in Diodorus. Books 1, iii, iv and v were also read 
in connection with the five mentioned. Enough has been examined 
to give a very accurate idea of the language and style of our author. 

After this, indirect evidence for more sources than one has been 
obtained by showing that the narrative breaks into four sections. 
ach section was then examined for its sources. 

Besides the dissertations and papers already referred to, there is 
scarcely a pamphlet or article relating to Diodorus that has not 
been surveyed; but as they rarely furnished material for the 
purpose of this paper they have been left unnamed: The majority 
of them can be found in Wachsmuth and Schoenle. Most useful 
in the study of the language have been the American Journal of 
Philology (A. J. P.), vols. i-xviii; Prof. Gildersleeve’s Justin 
Martyr ; W. Schmid’s Atticismus, especially the fourth vol.; F. 
Krebs, Prdposit. ὁ. Polyb.; Prdapositionsadverbien ; Zur Rection ἃ, 
Casus i. d. sp. gr. Hist.; Kaelker, Quaest. d. eloc. Pol. , Leip. Stud. 
iv 290; J. Stich, D.. Polyb. dic. genere, Act. Sem. Beane. 4 ii 186, 
The SN observations on Polybius are based on his fourth 
book ; those on Dionysius Halicarnussus, on the fifth and sixth 
books of his Antiquitates Romanae. 

The Teubner text both of F. Vogel and of L. Dindorf has 
been the text for the investigation, but chiefly the former. 

(In order to keep this dissertation within moderate compass, I 
_ have given at all times only the principal results, omitting unim- 
portant details, and I have dwelt especially on the general study 
_of Diodorus’ language. For the same reason I have also not cited 
᾿ many examples under each phenomenon treated. 


~~. 


8 Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 


GENERAL Stupy OF Dioporus’ LANGUAGE. 


Diodorus writes in the Κοινὴ διάλεκτος, understanding by this 
a dialect that in all essentials but that of pureness of vocabulary is 
Attic, though in detail it diverges also from Attic syntax, ef. 
Hewlett, Art. Infin. in Polybius, Amer. Jour. Phil. xi 268. 
Diodorus belongs to the better class of writers of the κοινή. The 
writer whom he nearest approaches—and he approaches him very 
near—is Polybius, which will appear in the course of this paper, 
A treatise De Sermone Diodori was prefixed by Dindorf to his 
edition, and this is to be found, with additions and corrections, in 
the edition of Vogel. What will be given below is meant as an 
addition to the above treatise. The De Sermone Diodori is cited 
| from Vogel’s Lntroduction. 


INFLECTION. 


The Doric genitive of proper names has not disappeared, as 
evidenced by Bovta, iv 23, 2; Τριόπα, v 61, 3; ᾿Αμίλκα, xi 21, 
4; ᾿Αναξίλα, ib. 66, 1 (Αναξίλου, ib. 76, 5); Καλλικρατίδα, xiii 
99, 4. 

Higher κοινή does ποῦ. entirely give up the Attic declension, 
though it is far gone already in Polybius, W. Schmid, Attecismus, 
iv 582. A few forms are found in our author: ved, xiii 82, 3; 
ved, ib. 41, 3; νεών, ib. 90, 2; νεώς (ace. plur.), xi 25, 1, though 
forms of ναός are more usual; χρυσόκερων, iv 13, 1; ἵλεων, ib. 
24,4; Tevayeo, v 61, 1. 

The gen. plur. of o-stems appears to be contracted: ὀρῶν, v 25, 
3; ἐθνῶν, ib. 24,1; βελῶν, xii 42, 5. γῆρας has γήρως in the 
gen. sing. Forms of κρέας are κρεῶν, v 28, 4; κρέασι, ib. 34, 2; 
κρέα, ii 59,1: of κέρας, κέρατος, xviil 30, 3 and κέρως, iv 22, 6; 
κέρατα, ib, 22,6. Περικλῆς is declined ἸΠερικλέους, xii 38, 3 ;— 
εἴ, ib. 38, 2 ;—éa, ib. 27, 1. The declension of Ἡρακλῆς is simi- 
lar :—éovs, ii 46, 5 ;—e?, iv 21, 3;—éa, ii 46, 3 (---ἣν was not 
found, though on Attic snbosi persis of this pero Meisterhans, 
Gr. ri alt. Tasche. 2nd ed., Ρ. 107). 

The gen. plur. of stems in ev preceded by « do not undergo 


Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 9 


contraction, Meisterhans, p. 111: Πλαταιέων, xii 41, 2; Μηλιέων, 
xi 4, 7, cf. 13, 5; 14, 5. 

Contract forms in ἡ for the neuter plural of v-stems are not 
found on inscriptions, Meisterhans, p. 118; but Diodorus has 
ἡμίση, xviii 19,4; 46, 2. The feminine is in esa, as γλυκεῖα, 
ii 58, 7. 


Locan Enprnes. These endings belong to legal phraseology, 
the literary form being the prepositional phrase; and they dis- 
appeared in the κοινή, Schmid, 1. ¢., iv 585. The locative 
᾿Αθήνησι never entirely vanishes from inscriptions; and the Local 
Endings are revived by the Atticists, Schmid, |. ¢., and in general, 
Main, Locative Expressions in the Attic Orators, Baltimore, 1892. 
᾿Αθήνησι is the only locative expression found in our author, and 
usually when the name of the archon at Athens is given, xii 38, 
1; xiii 27, 4; 38, 1; 43, 1; xviii 13, 6. Thucydides employs 
᾿Αθήνησι only twice, both times in official language, ν 25, 1; 47. 


Πᾶς and ἅπας divide the honors fairly between them ; cf. on 
these words Diels, Gt. gel. Anz., 1894, 298 ; Schaefer, Dem. wu. 8. 
Zeit., iii 296. Not infrequently σχεδόν is connected with them, 
σχεδὸν ἅπαντας, iv 10,5; 29,4; xiii 47,3; xviii 29, 4, 

Τάχιον is the comparative of ταχύς, ii 5, 5; xiii 106, 1, ef. 
Rutherford, New Phrynichus, 150—a N. T. form, Schmid, 1. «., 
iv 28. ; 

θαυμαστός compares as follows: θαυμαστός, θαυμασιώτερος, 
θαυμασιώτατος, Rademacher, Rhein. Mus., xlix 106 N. 1. 

According to H. Schmidt, De dualt graecorum et emoriente et 
reviviscente, Breslay, 1893 (Rev. in A. J. P., xiv 521), there is a 
gradual decline of the dual from Aristotle to Diodorus, after 
whom it begins to rise again. Except ἄμφω, frg. 23, 201, υἱοῖν, 
frg. 31, 19, 2, the dual in Diodorus is confined to δύο, δυοῖν (35 
times) predominating over δυεῖν (12 times). The dative δυσί is 
found 38 times, Schmidt, 1]. ¢., p. 25. Polybius has six nominal 
forms in the dual, Hasse, N. Jahrb. 147, 164. 


Pronouns. The indirect reflexives are rare, the singular οὗ of 
ἕ not appearing at all, which is also true of Polybius. The forms 


10 Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 


found are σφῶν, xiii 45,10; σφίσι, ib. 46,3; σφᾶς, xii 41, 6; 
xi 58, 5, where it is used with αὐτούς as a direct reflexive; and 
the pronominal adjective opérepos. Polybius employs these more 
frequently, iv 5, 4,6; 7,2; 9,8; 10, 3,7; 12, 6, ete.; and this 
is true of Dion. Hal., Ant. Rom., v 11, 16 (bis); vi 27, 27, 36, 
62, 64. 
᾿ς ἑαυτοῦ stands to αὑτοῦ in about the ratio 3:2. On these forms 
and the reflexive pronoun in the older language, ef. Dyroff, Gesch. 
d. pr. reflex., Wirzburg, 1892 ἃ. 1893; Rev. in A. J. P., xviii 
214-224. | 
t-paragogicum seems not to be used with demonstratives. 
ἐκεῖνος appears without its initial ε in κείνου, xili 68, 6. 


Verses. In our author the optative is nearly dead, though not 
so far gone as in Ν, Τὶ Greek. Polybius also has lost much in 
the optative. The Ist aor. opt. 3rd sing. ends in az, xi 46, 2; xiv 
66, 1, in εἰεν, xi 58, 5; xiii 28, 3: for the 3rd plur. ef. Vogel, 
Introd., xli, and Kaelker, De Diodori Hiatu, Leip. Stud. iv 309. 
Τίθημι has the 2nd aor. opt. of thematic verbs, σύνθοιντο, ii 33, 
5; συγκατάθοιτο, ib. 14, 4. 

ἅλίσκομαι takes the augment and reduplication ἡ, ἡλωκώς, 
xviii 18, 2; xi 25, 2 (v. b. éaA—); ἥλωσαν, xi 65, 4. 

The 2nd aor. mid. ind. is found with endings of the Ist: 
εἵλαντο, xiii 69,3; 74,1; 98, 4: ἀπείπαντο, xviii 39,2. The 
form ἐγενήθην, xiii 38,3; 51, 8; 63,1, is treated by Hultzsch, 
1). erzahl. Zeitform, ὁ. Polyb., ii 350. ἑλῶ occurs as the future of 
αἱρῶ, ii 26, 9. An aor. pass. of ὁρῶ is ἑωράθην, xviii 16, 1. 
ἀπεκρίθην, xviii 17, 7 is familiar to readers of N. T. Greek ; but 
also ἀπεκρινάμην, xiii 88, 7. From bk. xviii we find that the 
compound forms of the pluperfect are to the simple as 7:6. The 


great majority of the compound forms are active, whereas the ~ 


simple forms are for the most part passive. ἵστημι has both long 
and short forms in the perf. act. part.: ἐφεστῶτας, v 18, 4; xiii 
94,5; ἐνεστηκότας, xili 88,4; 99,6; xviii 7,5. ἔδωκαν is the 
3rd plur. of aor. ind. of δέδωμι, xii 42, 6; 44,3; xiii 68, 1. 
Passing of pc-verbs over into w-verbs seems to be confined to 
ἵστημι and δείκνυμι: ἀφιστάνειν, xi 28, 3; συνίστανεν, xi 55, 8; 
ef. xiii 48, 4; xviii 70,1; ἀπεδείκνυε, xii 40, 4, though Kaelker, 


Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. il 


1. ¢., states that verbs in μὲ have in the infinitive εν before vowels 
and vac before consonants. 


Adverbial forms in θὲν are fairly numerous: ἄπωθεν, xiii 59, 
6; αὐτόθεν, xii 15, 5; ἐκεῖθεν, xviii 54,3; ἔμπροσθεν, ib. 27,1; 
ἐντεῦθεν, xiii 63, 4; ἔξωθεν, ii 16, 10; ἔσωθεν, ibid.; ὅθεν, ii 31, 
10; xiii 37, 5; 49, 3 (which is liked also by Polybius, iv 72, 4; 
86, 5); οἴκοθεν, xiii 72, 3; ὄπισθεν, xviii 27, 1; πανταχόθεν, xiii 
49,2; πάντοθεν, xviii 28, 5; πόθεν, xiii 29, 3. Forms in 7 are 
rare, aS ταύτῃ, xii 47,1. 7 is a favorite of Thucydides, ii 18, 1; 
67, 2; 70, 4,4; 74, 6; 79, 6; 100, 6; iii 13, 2; 25, 1, cf. Polyb., 
iv 43, 2,4. Rare also are forms in oz, ὅποι, xviii 32, 2, and in 
ov, αὐτοῦ, xi 14, 2; 29,4; xiii 77, 2; 104, 2; οὗ, xiii 40, 6; 
ἥπου, xiv 69,1. Indefinite pronominal abverbs are scarcely to 
be found, μάλιστά πως, xiii 24, 2, though freely employed in 
Polybius. 

The neut. sing. of the substantivized adjective not infrequently 
serves as an adverb: τὸ παλαιόν, iv 12, 3; τὸ ὕστατον, ib. 27, 3; 
τὸ παράπαν, ν 17,4; τὸ ὕστερον, ν 6,33; τὸ πρῶτον, ibid.; τὸ 
ἀληθές, ν 49, 4: τὸ τελευταῖον, xi 52,4; τοὐναντίον, xii 26, 2; 
τὸ σύνολον, xii 16,1; ταὐτόματον, xii 88, 4: τὸ ἔσχατον, xviii 


67, 3. 


We may append here that Diodorus is not consistent in writing 
ps, or pp, the latter of which is Attic, Herodian (Lentz), i 15, 18, 
the former Ionic and Thucydidean, Kiihner-Blass, Gr. Gr., I’ 
147: τάρσος, xiii 99,3; πυρσεύω, xii 49,4; τύρσις, xi 38, 4; 
but θαρρῶ, xiii 18, 5; Tuppyvia, ν 13, 4; Χερρόνησος, xiii 66, 3 
(Vogel, Introd., lxxii N.); ἄρρην, ii 45, 3. 


12 Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 


SyNTAX. 


ApposiTIion. An apposition to an accusative may be in the 
nominative: v 7, 1, αὗται δ᾽ εἰσὶ τὸν ἀριθμὸν ἑπτά, προσηγορίας 
δ᾽ ἔχουσι ταύτας, Στρογγύλη καὶ Ἑὐώνυμος ; cf. ν 12, 4, where 
the nominatives are, as it were, in quotation marks. 

In certain sections, as in the latter half of bk. xii, our author 
adds πόλις to the name of the city: xii 44, 1, πόλιν ᾿Αλόπην ; 
72, 7, Mévdn πόλις; 77, 5: xviii 12, 4, πόλιν Λαμίαν. Herodotus 
makes much of this apposition of πόλις, 1 168; 189; 193: ii 169: 
vii 124, which was due to the low state of the knowledge of 
geography in Greece, Kallenberg, Philologus, xlix 540. 


SUBSTANTIVIZED NEUTER ADJECTIVES. This is a recognized 
mark of Thucydides, C. F. Smith, Poet. Construc. in Thuc., Trans. 
Amer. Phil. Assn., 1895, 95 ff. No influence of Thucydides on 
Diodorus in this respect is apparent. Both adjectives and parti- 
ciples are substantivized, and there is nothing peculiar in Dio- 
dorus’ usage except that they are seldom in any case but the 
nominative and, more generally, the accusative: xviii 1, 3, 5; 8, 
4;17,7;19, 1; 22, 3, 5; 25, 4; 28, 5; 47, 1; 52, 4; 59, 4; 60, 1. 


παραθαλάττιος, xii 44,1; θαυμάσιος, xi 89, 4; νόμιμος, iv 9, 
3; ἐλεύθερος, iv 31, 8, are used as adjectives of two endings. 


NuMBER. Examples of the singular employed as a collective 
are πλίνθος, ii 8, 7; κάλαμος, xiii 113, 1; σχοῖνος, 11 49, 2. 

Diodorus speaks in the author’s plural: 14, 4; 5, 2; xii 84, 4; 
xi 1,4. 


Cases. The neuter plural subject takes regularly a singular 
verb: ii 5,1; xiii 42, 6, though the verb is often plural in late 
Greek, Gildersleeve, Justin Martyr, A. 3. 3. 

Classic usage of ὦ in address was reversed in late Greek, and 
so the few speeches in the Βιβλιοθήκη show that Diodorus is at 
least inclined to omit it: without ὦ, xiii 20,1; 21,4; 28, 2,3; 
29,1; 52, 3; 102, 2; with ὦ; xiii 20, 5; 21, 8; 23, 1; 32, 6. 
It is omitted in N. T., Acts xvii 22; xxvi 2, 24, 25. Dion. Hal. 


Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 13 


appears regularly to use ὦ. Rockel, De allocutione apud Thucy- 
didem, etc., for classic usage. _ 


AccusATIVE. In his treatise, Zur Rection d. Casus i. αἰ. spdit. 
hist. Grdc., 2 parts, Munich, 1887, Krebs has shown how late 
Greek historians employ the accusative after certain verbs instead 
of the regular regimen, though in a few instances the change was 
from the accusative. Polybius and Diodorus sin very much alike 
in this respect, whereas Dion. Hal. has not often gone astray. 
Krebs gives the following verbs which may govern the accusative 
in Diodorus: πολεμεῖν, ii 37, 3; καταπολεμεῖν, ii 18, 1; συγκατα- 
πολεμεῖν, χνὶ 22,4; ἐνεδρεύειν, which, however, takes an accusa- 
tive in Attic, cf. L. and 8. 8. v.; ἐπιβουλεύειν, xxxvi 2, 3; 
ἀλγεῖν, xiv 112, 4; ἀπαντᾶν, xxxi 1, 2; ἀπελπίζξω, 19, 36, 5; 
κρατεῖν, xiii 52, 2; διαφέρειν, ii 5, 1; ἐντρέπεσθαι, xi 92, 3; 
κληρονομεῖν, iv 4,4. Krebs also cites the following verbs as 
taking an accusative, though in the older language they were 
intransitive: διαγωνοθετεῖν, xxxi 1, 1; εὐτυχεῖν, viii 25, 4; 
κατευτυχεῖν, Xx 46; παρασπονδεῖν, xiv 68, 3; προνομεύειν, xix 
25, 2; πλεονεκτεῖν, xii 46,3; χορηγεῖν, xi 44,4; ὑπερηφανεῖν, 
xxiii 15, 4; cf. Kaelker, ]. c., 294. Hiatus is said to be respon- 
sible for some of the changes in the cases used after verbs and 
adjectives, Krebs, Prdpositions-adverbien, 2, 58 ff., though his 
examples do not all require this explanation. 


CoanaTE AccusaTIVE. This σχῆμα ἐτυμολογικόν is compara- 
tively rare in Diodorus: ἐνίκα στάδιον, xii 82, 1; ναυμαχίαν 
νικᾶν, xiii 102, 4. Lobeck, Paralip., 501-38 ; Schulze, Comm. in 
hon. Rib., 1888, 153-171. Socrates was fond of this σχῆμα---ἰῃ 
reality, a tpo7ros,—Newhall, Dram. and Mimet. Features of the’ 
Gorg. of Plato, Baltimore, 1891, p. 17. 


-ADVERBIAL AccusATIVE. For τὴν ταχίστην we may cite xi 
19, 2; 28, 2; 36, 3. τρόπον is used as in Herodotus (vi 37), 
ἀνδραπόδων τρόπον, xiii 15, 2. τοῦτον τὸν τρόπον has the 
advantage over τούτῳ τῷ τρόπῳ, but only in a small degree. 
On the disappearance of τρόπῳ before τρόπον consult A. J. P., 
xi 521. 


14 Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 


ACCUSATIVE OF SPECIFICATION. In his fondness for this accu- 
sative Diodorus often uses it pleonastically : νέος τὴν ἡλικίαν, xii 
43,2; τὸν τρόπον ἀγαθός, xi 8, 5; τοσαῦται τὸ πλῆθος, xi 3, 9; 
4,7; ef. xii 55, 8; xi 11,2; 50,6; 56,3. πλῆθος is not infre- 
quently joined to τοσοῦτος, and τὸν ἀριθμόν to numerals or words 
expressive of quantity. | 


In κατὰ τὴν ὀλυμπιάδα THY πεντακοστήν, ἣν ἐνίκα στάδιον, 
v 9, 2, the acc. ἥν is rather to be explained by an omission of 
κατά, due to the preceding κατά, than as an acc. of the point of 
time, which is said to be an Atticism, Schol. on Aeschin., iii 77. 
Ὀλυμπιάδα, καθ᾽ ἣν ἐνίκα, xii 5, 1; 29, 1; 38, 1, ete., shows 
that κατά was to be expected in v 9, 2. 


GENITIVE. 


PaRTITIVE. This genitive is found after verbs: κλέπτοντα 
τῶν βοῶν, iv 24, 6; xii 15, 8. In the manner of the Atticists 
(Schmid, iv 609) Diodorus frequently employs the partitive geni- 
tive with adjectives and participles: τὰ πλησιόχωρα τῶν ἐθνῶν, 
xviii 3, 2; τὰ συνορίζοντα τῶν ἐθνῶν, ibid. ; τοὺς ἐπικαίρους τῶν 
τόπων, ib. 4,4; 14, 7; cf. 8,4; 10, 2; ii 6, 8; xi 20, 1. πολλοί 
usually takes a genitive, πολλοὶ τῶν πενήτων, xi 86, 4; xvili 17, 
1; 21,2; 33,2; 67,3. The singular of πολύς is also thus used, 
τῆς χώρας πολλήν, xii 42, 6,7; 81,4: v 23, 2, which is often 
the construction of πολύς in Thucydides according to the schol. 
on i 5, 1. Thucydides generally places the partitive genitive 
before its governing word (Morris, Introd. to Bk. I, p. 50); but 
nothing like this was observed in our author. 


The neuter plur. of the article with a genitive instead of the 
simple noun is occasionally met with, but no example of the 
singular article was found: τὰ τῆς τυραννίδος, xiii 85, 2; 95, 6. 


DATIVE. 


Loca DATIVE is used after verbs compounded with &; as 
ἐγγηρᾶσαι τῇ βασιλείᾳ, xi 23, 3; xiii 89, 2. 


Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 15 


TEMPORAL Dative. Diodorus appears to have lost ground in 
the dative denoting a point of time: τῇ ὑστεραίᾳ, xii 56,4; xiii 
3,1; 2,4; riow - - - καιροῖς, 18,8: xi 20,1: 16,2. κατά. c. 
ace. has usurped some of the domain of the dative. Extent of 
Time may be expressed by the dative, iv 3, 1, τριετεῖ χρόνῳ. 


MEASURE OR DIFFERENCE. οὐ πολλῷ ὕστερον and ὕστερον 
ov πολλῷ are favorites of Thucydides, i 111, 2; 114, 1: 11 27,1; 
30, 3; 80, 1, whereas Diodorus prefers ὕστερον πολλοῖς ἔτεσι, li 
39,4; 43, 7: v 9,1. πολύ is in our author more common than 
πολλῷ, Which is also the preference of Attic prose with the excep- 
tion of Thucydides, Joost, Sprachgeb. Xenophons i. d. Anab., p. 
144; B. Keil, Analecta Isoc., 140 f. | 


MANNER. μάχῃ, xii 43,4; 65, 6: τροπῳ, xii 42,8: φύσει, 
v 19,4: δόξῃ, iii 4,1: φρονήσει, ἱ 17,3: ἀνδρείᾳ, i 18,1. In 
xii 12, 1 Diodorus has the curious ἀποτυγχάνειν τῷ γάμῳ. 


CoMITATIVE Dative. This dative with αὐτός does not occur 
in the complete books, though it is found in the fragments, 
Mommseen, Beitr. z. d. Lehre v. d. gr. Prap., p. 391, A. 19. The 
preposition σύν is used with αὐτός : xii 3, 3, σὺν αὐτοῖς τοῖς 
ἀνδράσιν; xi 60, 6. Both αὐτός and σύν are omitted in 37, 26, 1. 


COMPARISON. 


πλείων not infrequently lacks the force of a comparative: 
πλείω ypovov,i 4,3; v 6,3; xiii 16,4. τὸ πλέον, iv 9, 3, has 
the force of “rather,” a meaning which it often has in Thucydides, 
Classen on i 49, 2. ~ 

Both ὅτε and ὡς are employed with the superlative: xiii 37, 4; 
98,4. ὅτι for ὡς in this combination is said to be Attic, Schmid, 
iv 610, 30. 


ARTICLE. 
Examples of ὁ δέ, “and he,” are not numerous: xii 44,1; 59, 
4: xill 3,5; ii 6, 5. Occasionally τὸ πρὸ τοῦ is found: v 81, 2; 
xi 63, 4. Forms of the relative are used with μέν - - - δέ (ods 


16 Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 


μέν - - - ods δέ, xi 44,3: xiii 50, δ), but one of the members 
may be a form of the article, τὰς μέν - - - ὧν δέ, xi 18, 6. 

On the omission of the article with θεοί (xiii 90, 2) see Schénle, 
Diodorstudien, pp. 89-91 (examples in bk. xvii). Very frequently 
it is omitted with abstracts, especially when they are with preposi- 
tions, πρὸς τρυφήν, ii 18, 3; ἐν ἀστρολογίᾳ, ii 29, 2; ἐπ᾽ ἀνδρείᾳ, 
ii 33, 1, etc.; and also in adverbial expressions: εἰς ἔδαφος, ΧΙ] 
62, 4 (Krebs, Prdp. ὃ. Pol., p. 20, refers Polybius’ usage of this 
to Thuc.); 87,4; ii 28, 7; 29, 6; 30, 1. 

The first position is the usual position of the attributive adjec- 
tive. The second, or oratorical, position is made use of, but not 
often enough to produce the ὄγκος spoken of by Aristotle, 
Rhetoric, 1407 b. 36. Rarer still is the ‘slip-shod’ third position. 
The following is the frequent position of an attributive participle 
and prepositional phrase, οἱ περὶ Σηστὸν ὄντες ᾿Αθηναῖοι, xiii 45, 
2; 47,2; 48,1; 49,2; 51,1; 67,7. Genitives not infrequently 
follow their regimen: xii 43,1; 46,3; 53,4; 54,1; 55, 3, 9, 
10, ete. Occasionally the adjective assumes a predicate position : 
γυμνοῖς τοῖς σώμασι, li 15,2; ἐν @pais ἔτι ταῖς πλίνθοις, ib. 8, 
4; ἐν ἀτειχίστοις ταῖς πόλεσι, xiii 114, 1. 


Wir Proper Names. Schmidt, De articulo in nominibus 
propriis apud atticos scriptores pedestres, Kiel, 1890; A. J. P., xi 
483-87 ; Herbst, Philologus, xl 372-382 (A. J. P., ii 541 f.);_ 
Kallenberg, Philologus, xlix 514-547. Anaphora is very irregu- 
larly observed. ᾿Ασία, Εὐρώπη, Λιβύη follow classic usage. 
Countries vary, though ἡ ‘EAdds and ἡ ᾿Αττική are the rule. 
Cities vary. Islands omit the article more times than they take 
it. Rivers show the familiar ποταμός with and without the 
article; and ποταμός may be omitted, even when the article is 
lacking: Τανάιδος καὶ Neidov, ii 2, 1, which often occurs in 
Philostratus, Schmid, iv 64. Mountains have the article, with 
and without ὄρος. National names follow no rule, though the 
two parties engaged in war regularly keep the article, as οἱ 
Πέρσαι and οἱ “Ἕλληνες, at the beginning of bk. xi; οἱ ᾿Αθηναῖοι 
and of Λακεδαιμόνιοι in the latter half of bk. xii; οἱ ’A@. and οἱ 
Συρακόσιοι, xiii 1-19. 


Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 17 


PRONOUNS. 


Αὐτός, in the nom., is not used as a weak οὗτος, as in the N. T., 
though the oblique cases may take the place of the demonstrative : 
πρὸς ἣν ἡμέραν - - - πρὸς αὐτήν, xi 21,4; xii17,1. Diodorus 
often uses αὐτός with μέν or δέ when the subject of both clauses 
refers to the same person: φυλακὴν κατέλιπε - - - " αὐτὸς δὲ THY 
παραθαλάττιον πορθήσας ἐπανῆλθεν, xii 65,7; 67,1; xviii 40, 
5,6: αὐτοὶ μέν - - - δέ, xiii 49, 38. αὐτός also takes the place of 
the direct reflexive: κατέλεξεν ἐξ ἁπάντων τῶν ὑπ᾽ αὐτὸν ἐθνῶν, 
ii 5, 8,18, 4; 19, 4, 9; 29, 5. The genitive of αὐτός may 
stand between the article and its noun, τὴν αὐτῶν τιμωρίαν, xiii 
91, 3, a position often found in Herodotus, Stein on vi 30, 7; 
[Dem.] 59, 58. | 

ἑαυτοῦ does not always retain its normal position: ἑαυτοῦ τὴν 
εἰς TO σῶμα ἐσομένην ὕβριν, xiii 90,2; 89,1. These positions 
are due to hiatus. 

The indirect reflexives are not numerous, in the singular want- 
ing, and rarely do they take the place of the direct reflexive, as in 
xiii 45, 10; 46, 8. Thucydides often employs the indirect for the 
direct, Dyroff, 1. 6. Likewise Polybius so uses the indirect: iv 9, 
8; 17,6; 24,4; 47,3; 61, 5. 

Very often the direct reflexive is represented by the adjective 
ἴδιος: ἐπιδείξασθαι τὴν ἰδίαν ἀρετήν, ii 6, 5; τὴν ἐδίαν θυγατέρα, 
ii 6, 9 ; τὴν ἰδίαν σκηνήν, ii 14, 2 : οἱ ἴδιοι is equivalent to ‘his 
own men,’ ὁρῶν τοὺς ἰδίους καταπονουμένους, xiii 60, 6; cf. xi 8, 
4; 10,2; 38,5: xii 50,1; 62, 5: xiii 109, 5; 110, 7: xviii 7, 
7; 14,3; 15,3; 17, 8. ἔδεος is also used predicatively, ἔχειν ἐν 
ἑκάστῃ πόλει πολχοὺς ἰδίους, xviii 8,2. Compound verbs are 
formed on the stem ἐδιο, ἐδιοπραγεῖν, xviii 62, 7; ἰδιάξειν, iv 26, 
3; ἐξιδιάζεσθαι, xviii 58, 1. Before Diodorus, Polybius employs 
ἴδιος in a similar way, τοὺς ἰδίους βίους, 11 15, 3; τοὺς ἐδίους, 111 
84, 11; cf. ii 21,5; 22,38; iii 81,4. Dionysius Hal. is sparing 
of this ἔδιος, τῆς ἰδίας εὐνοίας, vi 28; 88. We have it in the 
N. T., τὸν ἔδιον ἄγρον, Matt. xxii 5; Luke x 34. It is found also 
in Modern Greek, Hatzidakis, Hinleit. 7. d. neugr. Gram., 293. 

ὅδε, much used in tragedy, in Herodotus (where it often refers 


18 Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 


to what precedes, Grundmann, Quid in Arriani Eloc., ete., pp. 31, 
54, 87), and in Thucydides, does not often appear in Diodorus, 
nor does it always refer to the following, as may be seen at the 
close of several books: αὐτοῦ περιγράφομεν τήνδε THY βίβλον, xi 
92,5; xiv 117, 8; xvi 95, 5. ἐκεῖνος is rare except in phrases 
referring to time, κατ᾽ ἐκείνους τοὺς χρόνους, xiii 44, 3. As 
examples of epanaleptic οὗτος we may cite ii 60, 2,4; 64,1; 75, 
2; 77,3; 84, 3. 

Forms of ὅστις are not numerous, and Kaelker, |. ¢., 311, 
states that they are employed to avoid hiatus. ὅτου (only form of 
genitive on att, inscrip., Meisterhans, 123) is found in ii 31, 9; 
xiii 64, 7. 

Τηλικοῦτος is much liked by Diodorus, ii 3,3; 4,1; 12, 1: 
xviii 21, 1; 24, 2; and it is used with μέγεθος, ii 35, 2: xi 25, 3. 

There is little variation in the model of the relative sentence. 
To take the first thirty-four chapters of bk. ii, out of eighty rela- 
tive sentences one has-an optative (6, 6), one a subjunctive (14, 3); 
the remainder are in the indicative, mostly an imperfect or an 
aorist. Purpose may be expressed by a relative with a future 
indicative, xiii 2, 6; 6, 3; ii 8, 2 (ἔμελλε, of the past). The 
causal relative may have ye, iv 10, 2. Not infrequently a relative 
begins a sentence, often a genitive absolute, xiii 41, 2; 79,5; 93, 
5; 107, 4: xviii 31, 2; 44,5; 60,1. The relative may be used 
with a temporal or other conjunction : ὃς ἐπεί, xiii 41, 2; 104, 2: 
ἣν ὅταν, li 12, 3. Infinitive in the relative sentence is rare, xi 20, 
5, ἐν ois - - - πεῖσαι. Diodorus has but few attracted relatives. 
Of the number mentioned above in bk. ii, there are only two 
examples of attraction, both being from the accusative to the geni- 
tive: 11 4,1; 22,1. In Thucydides attraction of the relative is 
far more common than non-attraction, Reisert, Ζ. Alttrakt. d. 
Relativsditze i. d. gr. Prosa I. Wiirzburg, 1889, p. 52. 


VERB. 


Tense. A special treatise has been written by Dr. Τὶ, Hultzsch 
on the imperfect and aorist in Diodorus, De Elocutione Diodori 
Siculi: De Usu Aoristi et Imperfecti. Pars 1. Halis Saxonum, 
1893. His general conclusion will suffice here, which is that 
Diodorus’ usage of these tenses is that of the classic language. 


P\A\BRAR, 
΄. OF ΤῊΣ 
(| YNIVERSITY 


~ 
> 
δὴ 


_ Or - 


Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 19 


Eistorical presents are rare: πέμπουσι, xii 67,3; xiii 6, 2; 
ἐμβάλλουσι, ii 11,2. Polybius also has few historical presents, 
A. J. P., xvi 182, The Imperfect and the Aorist in Greek. It 
flourishes in the Atticists, Schmid, iv 617. 

ἐέναι has not entirely lost its future signification : διέξιμεν τὰς 
οἰκείας TH γῇ πράξεις, xviii 53, 7; 75, 3: ἐπάνιμεν, xi 12, 1. 
ἐλεύσομαι is the future of ἔρχομαι, xiii 31,5; xviii 10,4. No 
forms of the simple éévaz were found, cf. Hultzsch, |. ¢., 22, for 
lack of the imperfect. 

In agreement with classic usage (A. J. P., xvi 155) πειρῶμαι is 
followed by a present infinitive, ii 1,4; 29,1: xviii 52, 4, rarely 
by an aorist, ii 2, 2. 

"Αρχομαι also remains true to its present infinitive (A. J. P., 
i. c., 153 N. 2), 11 31, 9; xviii 66, 5. 

Μέλλω generally takes the present infinitive: ii 6,6; 17,3; 
30, 4: xvill 3,5; 5,1; 28,5; 65,1, more rarely the future, ii 
8, 3: xviii 1, 2. In classic prose there is a tendency in μέλλω to 
give up the future for the present infinitive, Fuhr, Rhein. Mus., 
xxxiil 575. 


Moops. As has been before stated, the optative is nearly dead 
in Diodorus. It is found most frequently as a potential optative : 
xi 11, 1, 2,3; 46,2: ii 14,4; 17,5: xviii 59,5. It is rare in 
final sentences (xiii 70, 3), in which the subjunctive is the rule. 
It is likewise rare after relatives, ii 6, 6, and ὅτι or ὡς, xiii 19, 4; 
41,4. Examples of the optative in indirect questions are ii 25, 4; 
xiii 16, 4; 95, 3. More often it is found in conditional and tem- 
poral sentences, ii 4,4; 5,5; 29,6: xii 9,3; 16, 3,7; 40, 1. 
There are no mistakes such as are made by the Atticists, e. g., 
Lucian, A. J. P., iv 428. 

The potential indicative is met with in questions, xi 11, 2; 
xiii 21, 3. 

av may be doubled, xiii 20, 5, an Atticism, schol. on Eur. 
Troad. 1244. 


IMPERATIVE. As in Attic, the negative of the imperative is μή 
ὁ. aor. subj., xiii 22, 6, or μή c. pres. imper., xi 6, 2; xiii 25, 1. 
Late Greek employs the aorist as the usual affirmative imperative, 


20 Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 


Gildersleeve, Justin Martyr, A. 16, 6, A. J. P., xviii 460; and 
examples of the aorist in Diodorus are xiii 24, 6 ; 27, 1 (bis); 28, 
3; one present, 30, 7, in these two speeches. The imperative is 
employed for the 3rd person, affirmative and negative: 15, 2; iv 
6,5; xiii 29,6; 31, 5. εἰρήσθω represents the perfect impera- 
tive, ii 5, 7; iv 12,8; xi 89,8. Miller, The Limitations of the 
Imperative nm the Attic Orators, A. J. P., xiii 899-436. 


ov μή. In Hellenistic Greek it is usual to express a negative 
future by οὐ μή with the aorist, rarely present, subjunctive. 
There is no special force in the οὐ μή, though the construction had 
its origin in emotion, arose in the ἀγορά, A. J. P., iii 202; xviii 
460. Prof. Ballantine, A. J. P., xviii 453 ff., has shown that the 
ov μή of the N. T. has no special force. Only one example was 
found in the five books of our author, and here οὐ μή and the 
subjunctive is nothing more than a negative future: δόντος 
ἀπόκρισιν ὡς ἄλλως οὐ μὴ συλλύσηται, xviii 18, 3. 


ΕἾΝΑΙ, SENTENCES. ἵνα aud ὅπως are the final particles, the 
latter having the upper hand, though sections of Diodorus vary : 
the eleventh book excels in tva’s, while the thirteenth has ὅπως 
almost exclusively. ὡς final and paratactic μή were not found. 
Thucydides freely employs ὅπως, which is not regular Attic usage, 
A. J. P., vii 55, 67. Polybius has ἵνα and ὅπως, more often the 
former, and, according to Kaelker, Quaest. αἰ. eloc. Polyb., Leipz. 
Stud. iv 290, ὡς eleven times. However, ὡς is eliminated by J. 
Stich, D. Polyb. dicendi genere, Act. Sem. Erl. ii 186. ὡς and 
ὅπως are the final particles of the Renaissance, Schmid, iv 88. In 
the 5th and 6th books of his Antig. Rom., Dion. Hal. uses ἵνα, 
rarely ὡς or ὅπως. The mood of the final sentence is in Diodorus 
almost exclusively subjunctive; but we cannot speak of repre- 
sentatio where the optative is nearly dead. There is no attempt 
at “elegance,” as in Lucian, whose optative is freely employed 
with ws after principal tenses, A. J. P., iv 428. Polybius has 
scarcely anything but a subjunctive, Stich, 1. c. The tense of the 
Siciliote’s final sentence is predominantly the aorist. 

ὅπως was found once in incomplete final sentence, xi 50, 4. 
Once it is equivalent to ὡς, ‘as,’ xii 31, 1. 


Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 21 


The final sentence ὁ. ὅπως may be used in the place of an infini- 
tive, πρόσταγμα, ὅπως - - - ζητῇ, v 50,2; xvii 18,4. Polybius 
so employs iva, Stich, 1]. c., 203. This is common in N. T. Greek: 
ἵνα, Matt. ix 25; xii 16; xiv 36; ὅπως c. δέομαι, ix 38 (Diod. 
xi 45, 5). 


VERBS EXPRESSING FEAR. εὐλαβεῖσθαι is the common verb. 
The mood is the subjunctive (indic. in iv 31, 3), and the tense 
generally the aorist : xiii 59, 8; 87, 2,3; x1 27,3; 32,5; 42, 4. 
We find μήποτε as often as μή: φοβηθέντες μήποτε Θεμιστο- 
κλῆς - - - βουλεύσηται, xi 27, ὃ. 


CONSECUTIVE SENTENCES. The consecutive sentence with ὥστε, 
an essentially post-Homeric construction, began with the infinitive, 
extending afterwards to the finite verb. This late Greek discarded 
for a return to the first state of the consecutive sentence. So Dio- 
dorus has mostly an infinitive, generally a present. We find an 
imperfect indicative in xi 30, 6; 61, 3: xiii 68, 4; a present, xiii 
100, 2; an aorist, xi 8, 2; xii 2,1; xiii 57, 5; and an imperative 
after a detached ὥστε, xi 6, 2. 

No consecutive ὡς was discovered, though Remacly, Lucian, 
Hermot., i 16, speaks of it as “sehr selten bei Diodorus - - - 
gebraucht.” — 

Interesting from the point of view of style is the use or 
omission of a correlative with ὥστε, A. J. P., xiv 241-2; W. A. 
Kckels, Trans. Amer. Phil. Assn., 1896, p. xxxvii. Diodorus’ most 
usual correlative with ὥστε is τοσοῦτος : i112, 1 (τοσοῦτο) ; xii 2, 
1: ii 23, 3 (ἐπὶ τοσοῦτο) ; xi 8,2: besides this, οὕτως, ii 31,3; xi 
47, 2 and τηλικοῦτος. Once an indicative is found after a cor- 
related ὥστε, xi 55, 6. The proportion of correlated to non- 
correlated @ore’s is about 1:1. 


Other correlations are not unusual: ἐπεί - - - τότε, xi 84,5; 
ἴω ῳ bd e / a eee 
τοσοῦτος - - - ὅσος, xi 21, 2; ὁπότε - - - τηνικαῦτα, xili 45, 9; 
ἐπεί - - - τηνικαῦτα, xili 47, 3; 66,6; ὁσάκις - - - τοσαυτάκις, 
xiv 69, 2. 


CONDITIONAL SENTENCES. These sentences are not numerous. 
The prevailing type is that with ἐάν (ἄν), and the tense of the 
εν 


22 Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 


protasis is prevailingly the aorist. No change takes place in the 
transfer to O. O., but the death of the optative removes the possi- 
bility of representatio. The rare pluperfect in the protasis of a 
logical condition is found in xviii 56, 4, εἴ τι κατὰ τούτων 
ἐψήφιστο, ἄκυρον ἔστω. 


TEMPORAL SENTENCES. The un-Attic ἐπεί (Zycha, Gebrauch 
v. ἐπεί ἐπείπερ ; ἐπειδή ἐπειδήπερ, Wien. Stud. vii 82-115) is 
employed more than ἐπειδή, usually with an aorist indicative: ii 
6,3; 17,1: xiii 49,6; 66,6: xviii 46,6: xi 8, 8 (ἐπάν) : xiil 
109, 5 (ἐπειδάν). Very frequent is ὡς with its limitation to the 
past tenses of the indicative: ii 19,1; 24,6: xi 2, 3,3; 3, 6, 6, 
7; 4, 6: xii 41, 5; 45, 5. There seems to be no intrusion of 
causal ὡς, which, beginning with Xenophon, is said to have died 
out in the κοινή, Schmid, iv 566. 

IIpiv. Examples of πρίν (πρὶν 4) are few and are all with an 
infinitive after an affirmative clause: ii 21,6; xi 9,3; xiii 10, 1; 
79, 8. Whether πρίν or πρὶν ἤ is to be used is decided by hiatus, 
Kaelker, 1. c., 310. This same principle holds in the 5th and 6th 
books of Dion. Hal.: πρίν (before vowels), ν 14,16: vi 29, 31, 
34; πρὶν 7 (before consonants), ν 14: vi 30. A.J. P., ii 465- 
483 ; iv 89-92 (Rev. of Sturm). πρὸ rod c. infin. is very rare, 
cf. πρό. 

Μέχρι, ἄχρι. μέχρι alone is used with ἄν and the subjunctive : 
xili 61, 4; xviii 58, 4; 65, 4, all aorists, whereas μέχρι οὗ takes 
the indicative: 11 9, 2; 33, 6. We find ἄχρις ἄν, xili 94, 5; 
ἄχρις ἂν ὅτου, xii 17,2. But on these see Dindorf, Introd. s. vv. 

“Eas. Not as many ἕως Β as μέχρι were found. ἕως ἄν takes 
an aorist subjunctive: xi 39, 5: xiii 61, 4: xviii 74,3. No ἕως 
᾿ οὗ was found in Vogel’s text. 


LocaL conjunctions are rare: οὗ (after τόπος), xiii 109, 4: iv 
21, 1: xiii 40, 6; ὅπου, ii 4, 4 (c. τόπος) : iv 28, 2: xiii 106, ὃ 
(= ὅποι). Forms in οὐ are said to have died out in the κοινή, 
Schmid, i 91: ὅποι, xviii 32,2. The use of οὗ and ὅπου with 
τόπος is to be compared with ποῦ and ὅπου as relatives in 


Modern Greek. 


Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 23 


ὅτι, διότι, ὡς, after verba dicendi. The mood is almost without 
exception the indicative, and the tense remains that of O. R. 
Examples of the optative are δέοι, xii 19, 4; μέλλοι, xiii 61, 2; 
παρακομίζοιεν, xiii 88, 3. ὡς ὁ. gen. absol. may take the place 
of a finite construction: λόγον ὡς διαπεμπομένων αὐτῶν πρὸς 
τοὺς πολεμίους, xiii 92,2: xi 64, 2. 

Rare is ὅτι introducing a quotation, xii 38, 3; likewise ὡς, xi 
6, 2. On this construction in Greek cf. A. J. P., v 221-227. 


PARTICIPLE. 


Diodorus is polymetochic, overdoes the participle, as do late 
Greek writers, A. J. P., ix 154; but there is no effective grouping 
after the manner of Thucydides. Diodorus uses the participle in 
a wooden fashion. The participle takes the place of dependent 
sentences, which we have seen to been altogether few in number, 
comparatively speaking. 


GENITIVE ABSOLUTE. Of this our author is pleased to make 
much, employing about three to the Teubner page. Causal and 
temporal relations are those usually expressed in the gen. absol. 
Condition, which belongs to carefully elaborated works, is rare: 
in a treaty, xii 4, 5, and ο. μή, 11 6,10. The subject of the gen. 
absol. may be omitted: xiii 80,2; 91,4; 94,4. Α gen. absol. 
may be in apposition to the subject, xiii 99, 2, or another genitive, 
v 24,2. Cf. Gen. Absol. in Att. Orat., A. J. P., vi 324. 


ACCUSATIVE ABSOLUTE. A post-Homeric construction. It dies 
in late Greek, cf. Gregory of Corinth, p. 79 (Schaefer), ᾿Αττικὸν 
καὶ τὸ εὐθεῖαν ἀντὶ γενικῆς παραλαμβάνεσθαι, where the ace. 
absol. is regarded as nom. absol. One acc. absol. was found, 
παρόν, xiii 52, 7, but the impersonal absolute is the gen. in 
ὁμολογουμένου ὄντος, i 24, 2; ζητουμένου, v 2,5. Cf. A. J. P., 
l.c., 336. 


Purpose. Expression of purpose by means of the future parti- 
ciple is very extended in Diodorus, more than in any other writer, 
according to Rademacher, Gram. 2. Diodor., Rhein. Mus. xlix 


24 Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 


163-7. The most striking peculiarity lies in the article, which, 
for instance, is not used with the participle attribute of a proper 
name that is the object of a verb: xiii 11, 6, Σίκανον - - - 
ἀπέστειλαν - - - ἀπαγγελοῦντα. 

ἅτε is rare, but ὡς is very common. ὡς ἄν, used in connection 
with a participle, accords with the mechanical syntax of late 
Greek. It is found a goodly number of times, mostly with a gen. 
absol.:: xiii 47, 5; 50, 6; 51, 8; 67, 3; 79, 3; 90,7; 98, 5: 
xvili 6, 4; 22, 8; 26, 2. . 

καίτοι and xaizep are kept distinct, though not in Polybius, 
Stich, 1. ο., 205. 

φθάνω, NavOdva, τυγχάνω. The first two hold strictly to 
identity of tense, though a perfect participle may be coupled with 
an aorist: xi 40, 3; xii 55, 4; xiii 31,3; 74,2; 95, 2. Identity 
of tense is not found with τυγχάνω : xviii 4, 1; 52, 1; 68, 3. 
Homer and Attic writers treat these verbs in a similar way, 
Bolling, Part. in Hesiod, Cath. Univ. Bull., iii 456; A. J. P., xii 
76-79 ; Harvard Studies, 1891. 


EFFACEMENT OF TEMPORAL DistincTIon. As in Polybius 
(Stich, 1. c., 186), so in Diodorus temporal distinction between the 
aorist and the present participle suffers effacement : πυθόμενος and 
πυνθανόμενος are scarcely distinguishable, xiii 45, 2; 49, 2; 51, 
7; 71,15; a present is found where an aorist would be expected : 
τὸ δ᾽ αὐτὸ καὶ τῆς Σεμιράμιδος ἐπιτελούσης, ὡς ἤγγισαν ἀλλή- 
λοις τὰ στρατόπεδα, Σταβροβάτης - - - προαπέστειλε, ii 19,1; 


xiii 61, 1; οἵ, Hultzsch, 1]. ο., p. 28. 


A number of adverbs are formed from participles, of which 
the following have been collected: διηλλαγμένως, ii 31, 1; 
ἐξηλλαγμένως, ib. 42, 1 ; ἐνδεχομένως, ib. 25, 5; τεθαρρηκότως, 
xi 80, 2; πεφροντισμένως, xii 40, 1 ; ὁμολογουμένως, xiii 76, 2 ; 
τετολμηκότως, ib. 19, 1; ἐρρωμένως, xii 46, 3; ἀπονενοημένως, 
ΧΙ 68, 4; λεληθότως, xii 16, 2; πεφυλαγμένως, xi 56, 8; 
ἀρκούντως, xii 19, 8. 

INFINITIVE. 


Examples of the final-consecutive infinitive are: παρέδωκαν 
τὴν Πύλον φρουρεῖν, xii 63,5; ἔδωκαν οἰκεῖν, xii 73,1; 75, 4: 
xili 36, 2. 


Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 25 


ARTICULAR INFINITIVE. The percentage of articular infini- 
tives in Diodorus is small, about one to every four Teubner pages, 
to judge from bks. ii and xviii, which contain less than fifty in 
one hundred and eighty pages. Polybius’ average is 1.15 to the 
page, over four times that of Diodorus: Hewlett, Artic. Infin. m 
Polyb., A. J. P., xi 269. 

No τοῦ of purpose was found. Of the cases of the simple 
infinitive, the genitive predominates, followed closely by the accu- 
sative, while the nominative and dative are rarely met with. The 
non-prepositional form occurs one-third as often as the preposi- 
tional, nearly the ratio of Polybius. 

Prepositions and quasi-prepositions are as follows: ¢. gen., περί, 
ὑπέρ, χάριν, πρό, ἐκ, χωρίς, ἄνευ, πλήν; ο. dat., ἐπί, πρός, ἐν, 
ἅμα (five times, Krebs, Prdpositions-Adverbien, i 58); ὁ. acc., διά, 
πρός, εἰς, ἐπί. Neither μετά nor ἕνεκα was in the books under 
consideration. πρὸς τό takes the place of a final clause: ii 16, 7; 
xi 44, 4; xiii 112, 1; but was.not found with γίνομαι or εἰμί, 
though the latter is used with πρὸς τῷ, xiii 48, 5. ἐπὶ τῷ 
expresses cause of emotion, xiii 65, 2; 101, 1. The favorite 
preposition is διά, c. acc., a little less than one-half the entire 
number of articular infinitives. Thucydides is fond of διὰ τό, 
A. J. P., iii 197, and it is very common in late Greek. 

The tenses of the infinitive are prevailingly the aorist and the 
present, the latter leading. The perfect is found far less, though 
more than in Attic; especially used with διὰ τό in our author. 

The art. inf. expresses the abstract idea of the infinitive as a 
substantive, or a substantivized oratio obliqua: xviii 67, 4; 73, 1: 
xiii 60, 3: xi 45, 2. τό ζῆν (11 16, 3; 29, 2: xi 29, 3: xiii 79, 6) 
is an equivalent of Bios, but Diodorus has not reached the stage of 
using an adjective modifier with τὸ ζῆν, a later usage, Gilder- 
sleeve, Trans. Amer. Phil. Assn., 1878, p. 7. 

F. Krapp, D. sub. Infinitiv: Herodot bis Zosimus ; Trans. Am. 
Phil. Assn., l.c.; A. J. P., iii 192-202; viii 329-337. 


VERBAL IN Téos. 


This verbal is comparatively rare in Diodorus, and appears to 
be confined to the impersonal neuter singular. ἐστί and the dative 
agent are usually omitted: i 4,1; 94,1: v 1,1; 28,5; 83,4: 


26 Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 


xviii 55, 2; 64, 3. Aristeides has only three personal τέος 8, 
Harry, 1. ο., 44, though in Philostratus the personal is the regular 
construction, Schmid, iv 84. 

The verbal in τέος is post-Homeric, appearing first in Hesiod, 
Theog. 310; Se. 144, 161, φατειός. Not common in lyric poetry, 
Gildersleeve, Pindar: The Olymp. and Pyth. Odes, O. 2, 6. 
There are 32 examples in Thucydides, Funk, Rh. Mus., xxxii 
615 ff., mostly impersonal, 14 of them réa’s. A single count for 
Aristophanes shows more personals than in Thuc., and a decrease 
in τέα. One-fourth the whole number (53) belongs to the Lysis- 
trata. Xenophon is fond of it, Kiihner-Blass, 1΄΄ 290. The first 
vol. of the Teubner text of Plato shows that he makes much of it, 
very generally in the réov-form, without ἐστί or the dative. The 
orators do not show it great favor, though they employ a variety 
of verbs. Demosthenes and Isocrates use it most freely, Schulze, 
Quaest. gram. ad Orat. Spect., Bautzen, 1889. Kiihner-Gerth, II’ 
447-8 ; G. Meyer, Gr. Gram., 516-17 (2nd ed.). 

This verbal is a familiar and popular construction. 


NEGATIVES. 


No μὴ od was found. Heaping of negatives is avoided: οὐ μὴν 
οὐδέ, xiii 46, 1. 


Σολοικισμὸς ᾿Αλαβανδιακός. Steph. Byz. 5. v. ᾿Αλάβανδα " 
᾿Αχαβανδιακὸν σύγγραμμα, ὡς Φιλόξενος τὴν ᾿Οδύσσειαν ἐξηγού- 
μενος, ὅταν ἡ μὴ ἀπαγόρευσις ἀντὶ τῆς οὐ κεῖται. Schmid, ii 60 
N. 78, supposes its prevalence to have been due to the Alabandian 
rhetoricians Hierokles and Menekles; but Schmid does not trace 
it back earlier than Arrian. Prof. Gildersleeve, in a review of 
the third vol. of Schmid, A. J. P., xiv 521, cites examples from 
Diodorus, bks. xii and xiii; ef. also his “ Encroachment of μή on 
ov,” A. J. P., i 45-57. 

The majority of the μή for od’s in our author are with the 
participle, which is notable in late Greek, A. J. P., 1 55, and the 
rule in Modern: ii 10, 6; 16,4: xi 64,4; 65,4; 81,2: xii 42, 
2; 56,1: xiii 43, 7; 59,2; 61,6; 99,4; 100, 8; 106, 5: xviii 
9,4; 10,4; 13,1; 17,7; 28, 2; 35, 5; 50, 2; 74,1. After 


Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 27 


verba dicendi, especially φημί: 1115, 2; 16,3; 30,1; 32,2; 33, 
6: xi 37, 2; 50, 6: xii 49, 2: xiii 94, 3: xviii 62,7; 64, 6. 
With participle after verba sentiendi: xi 17,1; 65,3: xiii 78, 3: 
xvili 42,3; 59,4; 60,1; 64,3. Im relative sentence, xiii 17, 4. 

Dion. Hal. is not guilty of this solecism in his Antiquities, 
though in the de vet. script. cens., 422 1. 3, he has ἐπειδὴ μή and 
ἐπεὶ μή. The fragments of Nicolaus of Damascus (Miller, Frg. 
fist. Gir., iii 343-464) yield a deal of μή᾽5 for ov’s: frg. 49, after 
λέγων ; fre. 94, after ὅτι; so frg. 95; frg. 101, after relative ; vit. 
Aug. xxv, c. part. We have them in Strabo: c. φημί, ii 20 (bis) ; 
iv 3; v 6: ὁ. part. iii 5 (bis). In the N. T. the negative of the 
participle is usually μή: Matt., 18, 25; 22, 25, 29: Luke, 2, 45; 
v 19: Acts, 9,7: ii Thess., 3,11. αν] ον than Diodorus,. the 
remains of Philodemus show this μή : c. φημί, p. 91, col. liii, 
1.15; p. 153, col. ix, 1. 18; p. 188, col. via, 1. 8, Teubner text of 
Sudhaus, 1892. Before Philodemus nothing was found that can- 
not be explained, as μή ὁ. οἶδα in Meleager, liii (Jacobs), which is 
required by the element of will. 


The negative is frequently expressed by the a-privative. A 
goodly percentage are verbals in tos; as, ἀνίκητος, ἀνίατος, 
ἀνυπέρβλητος, ἀπροσδόκητος, ἀχείρωτος, etc. Diodorus occasion- 
ally uses two a-privatives together, but not often enough to 
produce the αὔξησις, for which Aristotle, Rhet., 1408 a 5, says 
the poets make use of it. Soph. Antig., 876, ἄκλαυστος, ἄφιλος, 
ἀνυμέναιος ; cf. Diod., ἄπαιδος ἀναρχία, xviii 2, 1; ἀσυντά- 
KTOLS - - - ἀπαρασκεύοις, li 26, 5. It is interesting to note how 
fond Antiphon is of the a-privative, and such words are thickest 
in the epilogue, where they are most to be expected. 


We may insert here a few observations relating especially to 
vocabulary. 

βούλομαι, θέλω, ἐθέλω, are not much changed from Attic 
usage, A. J. P., xvi 525. βούλομαι is the usual word; ἐθέλω 
regularly takes a negative: ii 13, 4: xviii 86,6; 106, 1; without 
a negative, xiii 69,3; θέλω is rare: ἄν - - - θέλωσι, xiii 91, 4; 
μὴ θέλοντες, ib. 100, 8. 

Of ra ὅλα Diodorus is fond: τὰ τῶν ὅλων ἡγεμονίαν, xviii 3, 
1; τοῖς ὅλοις ἐπροτέρησε, 7,5; cf. 15, 3, 5; 17, 6, ete. 


28 Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 


Periphrases with ποιεῖσθαι are numerous: 6. πορείαν, xiil 54, 
6; 61,6: προσβολάς, xiii 62,1; 86,1; ἐπιμέλειαν, ib. 55, 6; 
ἐπιστροφήν, ib. 111, 3; ef. Hultzsch, 1]. ο., p. 93, for others. 

A favorite circumlocution is συμβαίνει with an infinitive, in 
place of the simple verb, which is very often in Polybius, Stich, 
l. 6., 210: συνέβη τὴν γῆν ἔνυδρον γενέσθαι, xii 58, 3; cf. ib. 58, 
4: xiii 2,3; 9,2; 40,2, ete. The aorist infin. is almost always 
found with συνέβη, and the present with συνέβαινε. Thucydides 
and Demosthenes are fond of συμβαίνω, both personally and 
impersonally, as the Indices show ; not so the other orators. 

σπεύδω, ἀξιῶ, κρίνω, τολμῶ, are used to form circumlocutions, 

Words compounded with περί are not unusual: xii 45, 10 
(περιδεής, περιχαρής) ; 49, 2; 50, 2,4; 67, 2; 73, 5—especially 
in this book. | 

A suffix represented by numerous examples is #dns, which 
Schmid, iv 698, says was in a fair way to become the leading 
suffix of late Greek. Diodorus’ adjectives in dns are formed 
from nouns, which is within Attic limits, Lobeck, Pathol., i 458. 
Examples are πυρώδης, ἰλυώδης, i 7, 1; πηλώδης, ib. 7, 2; 
γεώδης, ib. 7,5; ἀερώδης, ib. 11, 6; θειώδης, ii 12,2; ἑλώδης, 
ib. 17, 5; γυναικώδης, ib. 23, 2; φλογώδης, ib. 50, 1; καυμα- 
τώδης, iv 22, 3; μανιώδης, ib. 3, 4; θηριώδης, xiii 22, 5; épywdns, 
xiv 17, 11; ταραχώδης, xviii 4, 7; τελματώδης, ib. 15, 5; 
παρρησιώδης, ib. 48, 3. Adjectives of this formation are favorites 
with medical writers, as an examination of words in dns in the 
Lexicon will show. ‘Their frequency may be conjectured when 
it is known that in the προγνωστικαί of Hippocrates there are 
fifteen such adjectives, several repeated a number of times. 


Our author takes great pleasure in using in pairs words 
synonymous or nearly so. There are over sixty pairs in the first 
thirty-two chapters of book ii: ἱστορίαν καὶ μνήμην, 1, 4; 
δυνάμεις Kal παρασκευάς, 3, 2; παραδόξως καὶ δαιμονίως, 4, 4; 
δυσεισβόλων καὶ στενῶν, 6,1; λύττῃ Kal μανίᾳ, 6, 10, ete. 


PREPOSITIONS. 


In addition to my own collections I have used to great advan- 
tage I’. Krebs, Die Prdp. ὃ. Polybius ; and Prdp.-Adv. i. d. spat. 
hist. Grae. 


Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 29 


Anastrophe is wanting, as it also is in Polybius; with Dion. 
Hal. it comes again into use, Krebs, Prdp.-Adv., i119, A. 1. 

In combination with adverbs we may cite the following: 
ἀπέναντι, xiii 54, 2; ἐπάνω, ii 9,3; καθότι, xi 2,2; καθώς, xxi 
16,5; προσέτι, i 98, 8; σύνεγγυς, xii 11, 1; ὑπεράνω, ii 54, 4; 
ὑποκάτω, 1 32,3; ἐνάλλαξ, xi 22, 2. 

Doubled prepositions are ἄχρι πρός iii 41, 1; ἕως εἰς, 1 27, 5; 
ἕως ἐπί, xii 2, 8 ; ἕως πρός, ii 48, 2. 

The following particles are placed between the preposition and 
its case: δή, iv 17, 2; dé, xviii 2,1; xiii 43, 1, etce.; τοίνυν, xvill 
5, 2; μέν, xiii 82, 4; μὲν οὖν, ib. 84, 6; 11 12, 8 ; γάρ, ib. 92, 2; 
ii 11,1; τε, ib. 92,63; μὲν γάρ, ii 29, 4. 

From bks. xi and xii we find that verbs compounded with two 
_ prepositions occur on an average of one to every three pages 
(Teubner). Compounds with three prepositions are very rare. 
Only three are given by A. Grosspietsch, De τετραπλῶν vocab. 
genere quodam, Bres. Phil. Abhand., 1895, p. 67. There are nine 
in Thucydides, Holmes, D. mit Prép. zusam. Verb. ὁ. Thuk., 
Berlin, 1895, p. 27. Of the single prepositions used in compounds 
κατά is the most usual, then διά and ἀπό, the first two of which 
especially illustrate the tendency of Late Greek to adopt the 
stronger expression. _The remaining prepositions are grouped 
according to their frequency as follows: ἐπί, avd, ἐκ, πρό, πρός, 
παρά, ἐν, μετά, περί, ὑπό, ὑπέρ, εἰς, audi; σύν and ἀντί being 
omitted because of the temporary nature of their compounds. 


‘Avda. Local, ἀνὰ τὸν ποταμόν, xiv 81,4. The general use of 
ἀνά in the κοινή is in ἀνὰ μέσον : Diodorus, ii 4,4; 7, 5; xi 30, 
5; xiii 79,6. Also ava μέρος, xiii 61, 6. 

"Avev. Dying in Polybius, and in Diodorus rare: ii 5, 2; iv 
18,1; xii 58,2; 77,4. χωρίς begins in our author to take its 
place, Krebs, Prdp.-Adv., 2, 29. 

᾿Αντί. Rare and denotes substitution: ii 6, 9; 8, 7; 12, 1: 
xiii 52,3. ἀνθ᾽ ὧν is barely found, iv 27, 4. 

"Amo. ‘At a distance from,’ xiii 6, 2, αὐλιζομένους ἀπὸ τῶν 
ὅπλων ἐν TH πόλει (Thuce., vi 64, 3, αὐλίζεσθαι ἀπὸ τῶν ὅπλων 
ἐν τῇ πόλει), ἃ sense not belonging to the κοινή, Schmid, iv 626. 
It may be used with persons, xii 80, 2; xiii 12,2. In τὴν ἀπὸ 


30 Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 


τοῦ τείχους ὑπεροχήν, xii 61, 5, cf. ii 3, 4, the prepositional 
phrase takes the place of the genitive, as in the N. T., Schmid, iv 
624. In expressions of distance, ἀπὸ πολλῶν σταδίων, li 7, 2; 
xviii 40, 2, in which there is Latin influence. Temporal: ii 4, 6; 
xiii 41, 1; 64, 7. 

"Axpt. Four times in Polyb., more often in Diod., Krebs, 
Prép.-Adv., ii p. 3: ef. xviii 74, 3. 

Διά. διά c. gen. with ἔχω, εἰμί, γίγνομαι, very rare, as in 
Polyb.: δι ὀργῆς εἶχον, xii 45,4; 78, 5; ef. Classen on Thue, ii 
. 37, 2, who is fond of this. Local διά is not unusual, whereas the 
temporal is rare, διὰ παντός, ii 16, 3. Instrument or means is 
often expressed by διά c. gen., διὰ τῆς τῶν ἄστρων ἐμπειρίας, ii 
25, 8: xili 66, 4; 73, 6; 105, 4. Very common is διά ὁ. ace. 
equivalent to ὑπέρ or ἕνεκα, an essentially post-classic construe- 
tion, Schmid, iv 446, and it is sometimes difficult to distinguish 
διά ὁ. ace. from διά c. gen.: xi 5, 5, μὴ διὰ κακίαν, ἀλλὰ δι 
ἀρετὴν κτᾶσθαι χώραν ; xviii 18, 4; A.J. P., x 518. 

Kis. Most common preposition. Used with the plural of per- 
sons, except in the fragments, Krebs, Prdp.-Adv., 1162. It may 
express ‘ground’ or ‘cause’: κατηγορήσας - - - εἰς ὠμότητα, 
xviii 20, 2: xiii 101, 3. Manner is thus expressed: εἰς τὸν 
᾿Μακεδονικὸν τρόπον, xix 4, 5. It often denotes purpose: xi 5, 1; 
17,4: xiii 45, 7,9; 52,1; 64,6; 70,3. There are not many 
adverbial phrases with eis: εἰς ἔδαφος, xiii 62, 4 (Krebs, Prdp. ὁ. 
Pol., 20); εἰς μέσον, ib. 18, 2; εἰς τοὐναντίον, xi 71, 5; εἰς 
τοὔμπροσθεν, xiii 19, 1. 

Ἔκ. The dynamic οἱ ἐκ to express the inhabitants of a place is 
common: xiii 48,6; 65,1; 69,4; 70,2; 72,1; 73,4; 100, 5; 
104, 3. It may answer to a partitive genitive: xiii 14, 4; 40, 5. 
Gives point of view: ἐκ τῶν ἀποτελεσμάτων κρίνειν, xi 11, 2; 
45,9; 55,6. Causal, ἐκ τῶν τραυμάτων ἀπέθνησκον, xiii 64, 7. 
With passive verbs: xxxi 8, 12, δοθέντες ἐκ τῶν πόλεων. Rare, 
as in N. T., in adverbial expressions with adjectives: ἐξ ἑτοίμου, 
xili 2,2; ἐκ τῶν ἐναντίων, ib. 101, 3; ἐκ τοῦ προφανεστάτου, xii 
39, 4, ef. Classen on Thue. iii 40, 4; Schmid, iv 447, who speaks 
of this as an Atticism. 

Ἔν. The locative disappeared, and so we find ἐν Μαραθῶνι, xi 
2,2; 6,4: ἐν Ἰσθμῷ, ib. 3, 3. Forms a predicate with εἰμί: ἐν 


Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 31 


ἡλικίᾳ, li 6,2; ἐν ὑποψίᾳ, xii 76,3; ἐν ταραχαῖς, ib. 81,2; ἐν 
τούτοις, xii 54, 7; 63,5; ἐν θορύβῳ, xiii 98, 1 (γινόμενα) ; after 
other verbs, ἐν παραθήκῃ ἀποδιδόναι, xv 76, 1; ἐν κεφαλαίοις 
εἰπεῖν, ef. Krebs on Polyb., p. 74 N. 1; Poppo-Stahl, Thue. i 51, 
6. ‘In respect of’: δόξαν ἐν ἀστρολογίᾳ, ii 29,2; 31, 2; xi 18, 
1; 39, 2; xii 11, 3. Manner: ἐν οὐδεμίᾳ τάξει, xiii 71, 3; ii 
19,1. With genitive: ἐν adov, xi 9,4. Time within which: ii 
8,1; 17,7; 30,7; 31, 5: ἐν ὅσῳ, xiii 113, 1; xv 71, 4. 

Ἕνεκα. ἕνεκα is preferred to ἕνεκεν (15 times), Krebs, Prép.- 
Adv., 8. Stands first to avoid hiatus, xiii 57, 5; xii 83, 4, though 
not in ii 29, 5: between the adjective and the noun, (dias ἕνεκα 
χάριτος, xv 72, 2, cf. Thuc. i 57, 4. This interposition (also 
between two genitives) became prominent under the Empire. 
Interchange of ἕνεκα and χάριν, iv 9, 3. Schmid, iv 450, for a 
history of the forms ἕνεκα, évexe(v), εἵνεκα, εἵνεκεν ; also Sobo- 
lewski, De Prep. Usu Aristoph., Mosquae, 1890, 8. v. 

‘Emi. c. gen. Local: L. L. Forman, The Dif. bet. the Gen. and 
Dat. with ἐπί Used to Denote Superposition, Baltimore, 1893; A. 
J. P., xviii 119. The genitive in almost every instance, rarely 
the dative; and occasionally the gen. 6. ἐπί merely denotes place 
where: ἐπὶ τῆς ᾿Ασίας, xi 37, 2: ii 5, 5; Schmid, iv 628. 
Whither: ii-13, 1, 5: xi 3,6; 30,1; 31,1; 32,1; 36, 7: xiii 
47,6; which is said to be an Atticism, Schmid, iv 451. Tem- 
poral: ἐπ᾽ ἄρχοντος and ἐπὶ τούτων furnish most of the examples. 
“Tn case of”: xi 26, 2; 48, 1 (bis). c. dat. Local rare: ἐπὶ 
Δηλίῳ, xiii 72, 8; xi 12, 4 (“over against”). For examples of 
interchange of gen. and dat., cf. Krebs, Prdp. ὃ. Pol., 84 A. 1. 
Ground or cause, often expressed in this way: ii 1, 2; 4,3: xiii 
61,5; 87,4. Numerals (usually πρός 6. dat.) : δευτέραν ἐπὶ ταῖς 
ἐνενήκοντα, xiii 82, 7. Condition: ἐπὶ τοῖσδε, xiii 114, 1. ©. ace. 
In measurements: ἐφ᾽ ἱκανὸν τόπον, ii 20, 6 : ib. 8, 8. ἐπὶ τάδε, 
a favorite of Polyb., is rare: ii 9,2. Measurement of time: ἐφ᾽ 
ἡμέρας ἐννέα, xiii 56, 5; 109, 4; xi 20, 3, and often. Purpose or 
aim: xi 2,4; 14, 3 (ἐπὶ τὴν σύλησιν - - - πεμφθέντες). Hostile 
motion: xii 82, 5; 60, 1; 72, 3: xiii 45, 2; 65,1; 72, 3. Quarter 
or direction towards: ἐπὶ τὸ χεῖρον, xiii 95,1; 12,1; ii 27, 3; 
xii 50, 1. 

“Eos. About half as many examples as in Polybius. Only 


32 Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 


temporal ἕως was found, which agrees with Krebs’ citations. ἕως 
τινός, common in Polyb., is rare: ii 56, 2, 5. 

Κατά. The most general preposition in Polyb., sixth in order 
of frequency in Diodorus. ὁ. gen. Local. ‘Down’: κατὰ τοῦ 
ῥεύματος, ii 11,5. ‘Below’: κατὰ ys, i 25,6; v 7, 4, Krebs, 
P. ὃ. Pol., 129 A. 1. “Against”: φρούριον ἐποίησαν κ. τῆς 
᾿Αττικῆς, xili 9, 2; xii 61, 1; 6. πόλεμος, xiii 4, 5; 70, 3; 
συμμαχία, xii 75, 3,4; θάνατος, xi 45, 4; τρόπαιον, xiii 102, 4; 
βουλεύσασθαι, xiii 92,5; φόρος (κατὰ τῶν ἀρχομένων)Ὶ, ii 21, 3. 
c. ace. Very common, especially with the names of countries ; 
and extension is not necessarily implied: ii 15, 4; 16,3: xiii 43, 
1; 108, 2. Position opposite: xiii 13,2; 78, 2: xii 70, 2: 1 
19, 4. Temporal, numerous examples, mostly with χρόνον or 
καιρόν : καθ᾽ dv δὴ χρόνον, xviii 1,1: ii 5,3; 14,3: xiii 43,1; 
44,3; 54,1. Distributive: κατὰ πόλεις, ii 6, 4; 8,2; 10,3; 
16, 4 (τὰ κατὰ μέρος, frequent); 28, 7: xiii 58,4; καθ᾽ ἑαυτάς» 
ii 82, 2; xviii 5, 4; κατὰ μόνας, iv 51, 6. Causal: κατὰ τὸ 
μέγεθος τῶν μισθῶν, xiii 52,5; 98,3. Norm (“according to”) : 
νόμους, xiii 48, 6 ; 57, 3; 86,3; 91, 3,4: ἢ 4,6; κράτος, 6, 4: 
xii 80, 6: i 3, 6, ete. May take the place of an acc. of specifica- 
tion: τηλικαύτην - - - K. TO μέγεθος, ii 3,3; 17, 5: xiii 68, 5. 
This last is not as common as in Polyb., who begins it, Krebs, 
144. Circumlocutions: τὰ κατά, often, as in Polyb., especially 
with names of countries: Ta μὲν οὖν κατὰ τὴν Ελλάδα, xiii 42, 
6; 47,2; 63,6: xii 76,1; 79,4; 66,4: ii 21,6; 31,9. κατά 
c. ace. may take the place of a genitive: τὸ κατὰ τὸν κίονα 
πλάτος, ii 8,2; 18, 2: v 5, 1: xiii 84,1, cf. Krebs, 1. ὦν for 
Polyb. οἱ κατά, with proper name, in Polyb., but apparently not 
in Diod. 

Μετά. As between μετά and σύν, Mommsen gives 74 cvv’s in 
the full books and 1276 werd’s. Adverbial: xiii 104, 5. ὁ. gen. 
For πρός : [πόλεμον ποιῆσαι] μ. τῶν Καρχηδονίων, xxii 18, 1, 
Mommsen, |. c., 391 A. 19. ὁ. abstracts, equivalent to an adverb: 
po. μεταμελείας, li 4, 6; σπουδῆς, 8, 2; αἰκίας, xili 19, 4; προφά- 
σεως, ib. 73, 3; ταραχῆς, xii 49,4. “In addition to”: xiii 114, 
1; τὸ στρατόπεδον μ. τῶν πολεμίων, xii 14,1. The circumlocu- 
tion of of μετά is rare: ii 10, 4: xiii 93, 3. ὁ. acc. Very common 
is μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα, xili 44, 3; 54,4; 55, 8, ete., which is the usual 


Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 33 


correlative to πρῶτον μέν (τὸ μὲν πρῶτον) : ii 6,9; 20,4; 25,1: 
a 71, 4: 17.2 79, δ. 

᾿ς Μέχρι. Far in excess of ἕως, and both local and temporal. 

μέχρι τινός is a favorite phrase in some parts, as bk. xiii: 45, 3; 

51, 7; 64,7; 66,6; 84,4; 111, 5. See Krebs, Prép.-Adv., for 

μέχρε in full. 

Παρά. c. gen. Occasionally expresses agent, 6. ἀπεστάλη, ii 5, 
1: xiii 64, 1; Rau in Curtius’ Stud. iii 1 ff. for classic usage, 
which he limits to λέγεσθαι, δίδοσθαι, ὁμολογεῖσθαι. Polyb., 
Diod. and N. T. have no παρά ὁ. gen. with non-personal regimen ; 
often in Philostratus, Schmid, iv 461. ὁ. dat. With non-personal 
regimen : παρ᾽ αὐτοῖς [se. πίθοις], xiii 83, 3. Apud: παρὰ τοῖς 
Χαλδαίοις, ii 29,4; 29,5; 14,3; 15, 4; with passive verbs this 
goes beyond Attic usage (Krebs, P. ὁ. Pol., 53): θαυμάζεσθαι, xi 
1, 3; ἐπαινεῖσθαι, xi 31, 3; θεωρεῖσθαι, xi 46, 4; καταγινώ- 
σκεσθαι, xi 54,2; πράττεσθαι, xili 5,1; μυθολογεῖσθαιε, ii 1,1; 
αἱρεῖσθαι, ib. 32,2; ἐκδίδοσθαι, xi 33,2; καλεῖσθαι, xii 70,1; 
ἀπολύεσθαι, xii 74,5; ἄγεσθαι, ib. 82,1; τυγχάνειν ἀποδοχῆς. 
“On the side of’ (military forces): xii 74,1; 70,1; 62,1; xi 
7,4. 6. acc. Majority of examples are local: παρὰ τὸν αἰγιαλόν, 
xiii 13,7; 14,4; 16, 6; 17, 3: παρ᾽ ὅλον τὸν τῆς ναυμαχίας 
τόπον, xiii 46, 2; 3, 2. Interesting is xviii 6, 1, πρώτη μὲν παρὰ 
(= facing) τὸν Καύκασόν ἐστιν ᾿Ινδική, ef. ib. 3, 3. Temporal. 
Not often as in Polyb.: παρ᾽ ὅλον τὸν βίον, xiii 103, 2; xi 46, 1. 
Causal : ο. αἰτίαν, xiii 87, 2. Contrary to: παρὰ φύσιν, xiii 111, 
6; xii 48,1; xi8,1; 17, 4. 

Περί. c. gen. May be equivalent to ὑπέρ: περὶ τῆς κοινῆς 
ἐλευθερίας ἀποθανουμένους, xi 4, 4. ο. dat. Polybius has one, 
Krebs, 101; Diodorus appears to have none. The dative comes 
back with the Atticists, Schmid, iv 624. c. acc. Local, many 
examples. Often the force of περί ὁ. acc. is no more than that of 
ἐν c. dat.: ἐν τῷ περὶ Κορώνειαν veo, xiii 41, 3 (to avoid repeating 
év); 9,5; 34,1; 36, 5. Temporal. Numerous examples in some 
sections: xiii 43,1; 54,1; 80,1; 103, 4; 111,1; 113, 1, and 
not often in bk. ii. With numbers: ii 18, 4; xiii 48,2. After 
verbs denoting activity: περὶ τὰς παρασκευὰς ἀσχοληθέντες, xi 
1,5; 3,9; 14,5: xii 51,1; 55,3 (6. γίνεσθαι). σπουδή takes 
both a gen., xi 3, 5, and an ace., ii 17, 3. Circumlocutions: οἱ 


34 Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 


περί 6. acc. nom. prop., an Atticism, Schmid, iv 463, and by the 
time of Polyb. meaning no more than the person expressed by the 
ace., Krebs, 103: ii 2,1; 21,4; 25,4: xiii 5,3; 12,6; 40,6:: 
xviii 22, 5. περί c. ace. equivalent to the simple gen.: τῆς περὶ 
τὴν νόσον δεινότητος, xii 58, 2; xiii 92, 5: τοὺς π. τὸν πνεύμονα 
τόπους, ii 12, 2, Τὰ περί c. acc. is common, especially with the 
names of countries: ii 5, 3; 6, 7; 18, 8; 28,3; 29, 3: xii 42, 2: 
xiii 39, 2; and used where the gen. would be expected : πυθόμενοι 
τὰ περὶ τὸν Εὐμένη, xviii 37, 2; xiii 56, 2; 112, 4, which is also 
the case in Polybius. 

IIpo. Does not differ from Polyb., except that no πρό = περί 
was found. The post-classic πρό = “ago” (Gildersleeve, Justin 
Martyr, A. 46, 2) is represented by πρὸ ἡμερῶν εἴκοσι, 1 48, 8. 
Examples of πρὸ τοῦ ec. infin. are xiii 30, 3; xviii 73, 1, ef. 
Krebs, P. ὁ. Pol., 38 A. 4. 

Πρός. Stands next after εἰς in point of number. No adverbial 
πρός was found, though Polyb. has πρὸς δέ. ¢. gen. Only in the 
formula πρὸς θεῶν, xiii 28, 3: Polyb. scarcely more. c. dat. “ In 
addition to”: ii 2,3; xi 48, 2: πρὸς δὲ τούτοις, ii 1,2; 16, 4; 
27,2: xi 1,5; 2,1; 3,7; 14,3; 41, 4. Often in the forma- 
tion of numbers: ἕξ πρὸς ταῖς ὀγδοήκοντα, ii 20, 2; 32, 6; 34, 1: 
xiii 18, 2; 36,4; 56,6. This begins with Pindar, increases in 
tragedy, strong in late Greek, but not found in the Atticists, 
Schmid, iv 650. Local. Frequent in Thuc., Classen on i 62, 3: 
πρὸς Ipépa, xiii 43, 5; 54,4; 59,5; 83,1; xviii 6,3; 34, 6. 
ὁ. acc. Local. There appeared no πρός 6. acc. equivalent to πρός 
c. dat. Purpose: εὔχρηστος πρὸς τάς τε - - - ὁδοιπορίας, ii 6, 6; 
7,2; 16,7: ΧΙ 54,2; 63,6; ¢. art. infin. ii 10, 5; 16, 7: xi 
44,4; xiii 49, 5 (no example with εἶναι as in Polyb.). “In refer- 
ence to”: πρὸς τὴν ὑπόθεσιν ταύτην πολλὰ διαλεχθείς, xiii 92, 6: 
often the circumlocution τὰ πρός : πάντα τὰ πρὸς τὴν στρατείαν 
ἡτοίμαστο, Xi 2,3; 16,1; 35,1; 56,3: xii 41,2; 50,4: xiii 
58, 8. Temporal. Not in Polyb. In Diod. we find πρὸς τὴν 
ἑσπέραν, xiii 111, 1; ¢. ἔφοδον, 109, 5; ὁ. καιρόν, 50, 3; 77, 5. 

Σύν. The percentage of ovv’s is about one-half that of Polybius. 
The majority is with persons, A. J. P., viii 221 N.1. Takes the 
place of the dat. of aités: νῆες σὺν τοῖς ἀνδράσι, xi 60, 6; xii 3, 
3; 55, 5; xiii 19, 3; but αὐτάνδρους [ναῦς], xii 48, 1; xiii 16, 3; 


Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 35 


xviii 72, 8. For comitative dative, of military force, xiii 64, 1; 
80, 5; of ships, xii 60, 6; xiii 63,1; 76,3; 99,3. ‘In addi- 
tion to”: ὑπῆρχε σὺν ἄλλαις πλείοσι βασιλείαις ἥ τε TOD Πώρου 
καὶ Ταξίλου δυναστεία, xviii 6,2; χὶ 4, δ ; xiv 109, ὅ. Krebs, 
Prip. ὃ. Pol., p. 37, 2, speaks of a temporal use of σύν, which 
is very rare. Mommsen, |. c., 391 A. 19, says that Diodorus 
remains truer to Attic usage than Polybius. 

Ὑπέρ. c. gen. Local: τὸν ὑπὲρ τῆς πόλεως λόφον, xiii 85, 4; 
40, 4. ο. art. infin.: xiii 79, 2: xvill 67, 1. ¢. τιμωρία, xiii 48, 1; 
59,6; 91,4. Equivalent of περί: ὁ. dsaywviferOa, xiii 51, 1 
(περί, 13, 5); xi 5,5; 9,1: πέμπειν ὑπὲρ εἰρήνης, xiii 52, 2: 
περί and ὑπέρ in the same sentence, ii 31, 6—common in late 
Greek, Schmid, iv 630. ὁ. acc. Local: ὑπὲρ γῆν (rest), ii 30, 6. 
Very often with numbers: ὑπὲρ tas δέκα μυριάδας, ii 18, 5: xi 
62, 1; 74, 1: xii 58, 2: xviii 12, 1. Superiority: ὑπὲρ τοὺς 
ἄλλους, v 72, 1. | 

Ὑπό. c. gen. Things may be used as agents by easy personifi- 
cation: μηχανῶν, xiii 62, 1; κεραυνοῦ, ib. 86, 2; ἀσθενίας, ib. 
89, 2; τύχης, ib. 90, 5; πόλεως, xi 59, 3; δεινότητος, ib. 63, 6 ; 
πνευμάτων, xiii 100, 3; Bias, ib. 40, 3. ὁ. dat. Local: ii 10, 3; 
not used in N. T., but revived by the Atticists, Schmid, iv 624. 
6. ace. Local: ὑπὸ τοὺς πόδας ὑποπιπτόντων, ii 19,6; 31, 5: 
Tov ὑπὸ τὰς ἄρκτους ᾿᾽Ωκεανόν, xviii 5,3. Temporal: xi 47, 2; 
xviii 16, 4. Subordination: ὁ. τάττεσθαι, ii 26, 8; 30, 6; 34, 2; 
xii 41, 3: c. substantives, ii 5,3: xiii 64,4; 104,4. λαμβάνειν 
ὑπὸ τὴν ὅρασιν, xiii 111, 4. 

‘Os. Asa preposition: ὡς τὸν βασιλέα, xviii 8,4; ὡς φίλον, 
xvi 82,3. With prepositions: ὡς ὑπό, xi 10, 2; ὡς ἐπί, xiii 61, 
ὃ; ὡς πρός, xii 61, 4. As a preposition it is common in Polybius 
and in Dion. Hal., after whom it wanes, being used only by some 
of the Atticists, Schmid, iv 631. 


Besides the prepositions proper there are a number of quasi- 
prepositions. Much of what is given below concerning them is 
taken from Krebs, Prdp.-Adv. 

Ακολούθως. ο. dat. xviii l, 1; 4,4; 5, 2. 

“Apa. In expressions of time: ἅ. ἡμέρᾳ, xiii 47, 1; 56, 3; 60, 
1; 62,1; 72,6; ἅ. τῷ φωτί, xiii 91, 1. With a participle added : 


36 Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 


ἅ. τούτοις πραττομένοις, xii 30,2; 32,3; 34,5; 47,4; 57,1 
With persons: &. τοῖς τέκνοις, xiii 58,2; 92,2; 111,6. ἅμα τῷ 
πρὸς τοὺς ἠτυχηκότας ἐλέῳ, xiii 20, 5. Mommsen, J. ὁ. 

᾿Αναμίξ. c. dat. xiii 89, 3. 

ἼἌπωθεν. c. gen. ii 4, 2; iv 24, 1. Comes into the κοινή 
with Diodorus; in high favor in Josephus, but disappears in 
Dio Cas. 

Aiya. The example (xi 62, 3) cited by Krebs is in a quoted 
inscription. Often in Dion. Hal. 

"Eyyvs. ¢. gen., xili 45, 7; xiv 95, 4: ἔγγιστα, xii 18, 3; 
σύνεγγυς, Xvil 55, 6. 

Ἔντός and ἐκτός. c. gen.; rest, xiii 3, 8; 13, 1: motion, xiii 
59, 8; xii 81,2. ἐκτός after its case to avoid hiatus, iv 11, 1. 

Ἕξῆς. α. gen., ΠΙῚ.42, 2; ο. dat., iii 44, 3. Polybius and 
Josephus also use it with a case. 

Ἐπάνω. c. gen.,i 51,6; 67,1; ii 9, 3. 

Κάτοπιν. c. gen., xi 8, 4. 

Μακράν. ὁ. gen., xvili 33, 2; 46, 6 (motion); xiv 47, 4 (rest). 

Meraév. Often in Polyb., but loses ground in Diod.: xiii 39, 5. 
ava μέσον contends for its place. 

Πέραν. σα. gen., 11 12, 3. 

Πλήν. ὁ. gen.; not as common as in lower κοινή : xiii 42, 4; 
83, 2; 85, 2. 

Πλησίον. ὁ. gen. Scarce in Polyb., but third in rank of the 
adverbial prepositions in Diod. (Krebs). After its case, xx 80, 1; 
83, 3. 

Πόρρω. ec. gen. Only in an excerpt, xxxiv 2,29. The com- 
parative πορρώτερον to avoid hiatus, xvii 60, 3; xviii 71, 5. 

Ὑπεράνω. c.gen. [11 54,4; v 38, 4. 

Χάριν. ὁ. gen. Uncommonly prominent in Polyb., but loses 
ground in later writers, though Diod. and Dion. Hal. have a fair 
number : ili 39, 9; iv 17,2; xiv 46, 3; 11 10, 1. 

Χωρίς. ὁ. gen. It is one of the words that take the place of 
ἄνευ, which shows symptoms of dying already in Polybius. Χωρίς 
begins to assume this rdle in Diodorus. “ Without,” xii 40, 4; 
xiv 105, 4. “ Besides,” xviii 58, 1; χωρὶς δὲ τούτων, i 1, 5; 31, 
3: i173, 3; xvii 10, 4. ; 


’ 


Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 37 


PARTICLES, 


_ To be noticed is the scarcity of particles, which is a character- 
istic of the κοινή. There are also few combinations of particles. 


᾿Αλλά. Not largely employed, as also in N. T., A. J. P., xvi 
526. Chiefly used after a negative. Introduces an apodosis, xii 
59, 4. After a positive member, xiii 56, 2; 87, 2—a solecism 
according to Boissonade Anee. iii 237, quoted by Schmid, iv 547. 
Combinations beginning with ἀλλά are few: ἀλλὰ γάρ, xii 64, 3; 
xviii 59, 2: ἀλλ᾽ οὖν, xi 59, 4. 

“Aya. Nota large number of adverbial ἅμα: alone, ταῖς ἅμα 
πλεούσαις, xiii 99, 3; in combinations, ἅμα καί, xi 74, 3; xii 81, 
5: ἅμα δὲ καί, xi 50, 4; 55,10: ἅμα - - - καί, xi 65, 7; 73, 3: 
Gpa te - - καὶ, xii 83,6: ἅμα --- τε --- καὶ ii 8,3: ἅμα 
μέν - - - ἅμα δέ, ii 6,10; xiii 43, 4 (μέν omitted in 89, 1). An 
extraordinary number of ἅμα᾽β is to be found in Thucydides (cf. 
Momnmisen, |. ¢., p. 385 f. for the prepositional ἅμα). He has over 
three hundred ἅμα, adverbially used, alone and in many combi- 
nations with τε, καί, μέν, δέ. In iv 30, 4 it is entirely local, καὶ 
ἅμα γενόμενοι πέμπουσι, and its force with him is often not more 
than that of a mere connective, i 9, 3 (Classen’s note). 

"Apa. None was found, though it is to be found in N. Τ᾽, 
Matt. xix 25. 

"Apa. Once in Thuc., i 75, 1. In Diod. in the speech of 
Nicolaus, xiii 24, 6. 

Γάρ. Often introduces an explanation in Ὁ. O. with no verb of 
saying expressed: xi 4, 4; 9,1; 15, 3, 4; 28, 2: xvii 17, 7. 
No combination was found in which γάρ stood first. 

Té. Not many yé’s alone, ii 18, 7; xiii 90, 6, πρὸ ye αὐτοῦ, 
which shows that Diod. does not employ yé to avoid hiatus, as 
does Polyb. 

Todv. Rare and second word in sentence, ii 29,6; xi 82,3; 
xiii 84, 1. Often in the Atticists. 

Aé. After a negative member, xi 78, 4. Without preceding 
μέν, xi 38, 7; 5,3; 8,5; 15,3. δὲ καί is a favorite combination : 
xili 48, 5; 44, 6; 57, 3; 59, 8; 61, 2. δ᾽ οὖν, a favorite of 

3 


38 Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War, 


Theophrastus, not in large number, xi 16,1; xii 48,6; 93,1; 
95,1; 96,3; 108, 5. 

Δή. In moderate number, and the majority of the 6%’s with 
relatives, ii 5, 3; xi 45, 2; xiii 45, 6; 64, 6; 77, 4; 104, 5; 
ἔνθα δή, ii 28, 1; xii 48, 2; ὅτε δή, ii 26, 3; xiii 90, 1; 6. οὗτος, 
ii 33,6; xi 55, 7; xiii 74,45; τότε δή, xiii 99, 5; δή ποτε, xill 
83, 2; δή πουθεν, xiv 66, 1. 

Διό. Between διὸ καί and διόπερ there is no difference beyond 
the avoidance of hiatus by means of the latter. Both are often 
used. 

Eira. Rare. ὁ. πρῶτον, ii 12,3; without πρῶτον, ii 28, 4. 

Ἔπειτα. δέ is always omitted. ο. τὸ μὲν πρῶτον (πρῶτον μέν 
or πρῶτον) : ii 19,17; 26,3; 32,3: without πρῶτον, ii 1, 2; 10, 
4; 26,7; 28,7; 29,4; 33, 3; 6. πρότερον, ii 32, 2. pera δὲ 
ταῦτα is the usual correlative to πρῶτον, cf. μετά. 

"Ere. ἔτι δέ is a great favorite in a series, in which it almost 
invariably introduced the third member, as xi 88, 2, προσβολὰς 
δὲ ποιούμενος τοῖς τείχεσι, Kal μὴ δυνάμενος ἑλεῖν THY πόλιν, ἔτι 
δὲ καὶ τῶν Λακεδαιμονίων ἀποστειλάντων ; ii 2,3; 5,3; 7,2; 
8, 7: xi 7, 2: xiii 58, 2; 60, 4; 61, 5. In his lists, as of 
countries, Diodorus attempts grouping: ii 2, 3 (in a circle to the 
point of departure); xi 3, 7; xviii 39,6. To omit all connectives 
is very rare, xii 1, 5; 42,4: xiii 89,1. Isocrates employs ἔτι δέ 
in a manner similar to that of Diodorus: 11 2, 3, 44; iii 24, 33, 
40; v 132. 

Ἤ. “Than,” without a comparative, δικαίως δ᾽ ἄν τις τούτους 
καὶ τῆς κοινῆς τῶν Ελλήνων ἐλευθερίας αἰτίους ἡγήσαιτο ἢ τοὺς 
ὕστερον, κιτ.λ., Xi 11, 5. 
᾿ Kal γάρ. In large number: ii 2,2; 3,3; 8,4; 29, 4; 30, 4: 
xii 54, 2: xiii 81,4; 90,4; 92, 6; 95,6; 110,1. καὶ ταῦτα 
is rare, xiii 8, 6. 

Mév. Solitarium: ii 8,7; xi 10,4; 46,4; 50, 3; xiii 44, 5; 
55, 7. Faulty correlation of μέν and δέ is to be met with: xii 
59, 2 (Λακεδαιμονίων μέν - - - - οὗτοι δ᾽ ἦσαν); ib. §2; xi 12, 3. 
Involved correlation of two or more sets of μέν----δέ᾽β is rare: 
μέν - - μέν - - δέ - - δέ, xiii 106, δ; μέν - - δέ - - μέν - - δέ, xii 
4,2; 7,2; 17,5; μέν - - μέν - - δέ - - δέ - - μέν - - δέ, xiii 45, 
7; but generally Diodorus does not go beyond one set. μὲν οὖν is 


Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 39 


a very common combination: xi 58,0; 65,5; 83,4: xiii 42, 6; 
44,6; 54,5. μὲν γάρ likewise is common: ii 2,2; 3,3; 4, 4; 
8, 4, etc.; xiii 54,7; 55,4; 88, 2. 

Μέντοι (Schmid, iii 341) is not often employed: usually with 
γέ (μέντοι ye) and correlated with μέν : ii 05, 2; 30, 8; xi 4, 3; 
xiii 90, 7. 


Myv. In negative combinations: οὐ μὴν οὐδέ - - - ἀλλά, xiii 
46, ; ov μὴν ἀλλά, ii 22,5; xi 13, ; 54, ; ov μήν γε, xii 79, 
6; xili 56,4; οὐ μήν - - - ἀλλά, xi 16,1; οὐ μήν - - - γε - - - 


ἀλλά, xiii 55, 3; 86, 3. 

“Opov. ὅμου δέ, xiii 43,6; 55,6. Mommsen, l. ¢., gives one 
example of ὅμου c. dat. in the extant work of Diod. 

Οὖν. Appears to require no special mention for any peculiar 
usage: cf. Kalinka, Diss. Phil. Vind. Vol. ii, De Usu Coni. 
quaed. apud Script. Att. antiq. 

IIep. One instance of περ alone, eis ἑαυτόν περ σπᾶν, xi 69, 8, 
Its chief function is to avoid hiatus, and so its force is scarcely or 
not at all felt, cf. Kaelker, 1]. ¢., 311. 

Πλήν (Schmid, iii 147, 343). In the κοινή, πλήν is often a 
conjunction, and does not differ from ἀλλά, This is rare in Dio- 
dorus: iv 13,1; xiii 56, 4. - 

Te. The greatest quantity of single re’s is in bk. xii. Not 
employed to connect words. It adds a postscript after the Thucy- 
didean fashion, xi 57, 6; xii 70, 5. τε - - - re occurs in xi 10, 2; 
τε --- τε --- καί in xii 54,3. τε καί is comparatively rare, 
though τε - - - καί is not, cf. K. Fuhr, Rhein. Mus. xxxiii 584 ff, 
re is correlated with ἔπειτα δέ, xiii 69, 2; with ἔτι δέ, xiii 114, 2. 
On τε see Schmid, iv 562-4. 

Τοιγαροῦν : 1i 29, 6. 

Τοίνυν. An Attic particle, Kalinka, 1. c., p. 198, which was 
almost lost in the κοινή. Not many τοίνυν᾽Β were observed: ii 1, 
4; 4,2; 29, 2. 

ὥσπερ. To avoid hiatus καθάπερ often takes the place of 
ὥσπερ: li 12, 2; 15, 1; 21, 8; xi 48, 1; xiii 41, 3; 50, 3. 
καθάπερ is legal Meisterhans, |. c., p. 2150, comes into literature 
with Isocrates, and is common in late Greek. We find also in 
comparison οἷον εἰ, xili 58,2; ὡσανεί, xviii 43,1; ὡσεί, xii 25, 
2; ὡσπερεί, xi 30,5; καθαπερεί, xili 27, 6. 


40 Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 


SENTENCE-STRUCTURE. 


From the middle of the fourth century B. C. Greek prose was 
as a whole under subjection to the periodic structure established 
by Isocrates, whose power was broken by Aelian and Philostratus, 
Schmid, iii 291. In our author the sentence is simple in structure 
and of short compass. There is a great uniformity of structure, 
which gives a woodenness to Diodorus’ style. A favorite forma- 
tion is that of the following sentence, xii 41, 7, οἱ δὲ Θηβαῖοι 
παρὰ τῶν ἐκ τῆς μάχης διασωθέντων πυθόμενοι TA συμβεβηκότα, 
παραχρῆμα πανδημεὶ κατὰ σπουδὴν ὥρμησαν ; cf. 42,1, 3, 6; 
40, 2: 47,1, 3; 48, 1; 49, 1, 5, ete. The skeleton of another 
favorite is οὗτος - - - πορθήσας - - -, καὶ - - - λυμηνάμενος - - - 
ἐπανῆλθεν, xii 44, 3. fParticiples play an important part in 
Diodorus’ sentences ; subordinate clauses are comparatively rare. 
Under μέν we have already seen how μέν and δέ are not used in a 
complicated way, nor often extend the sentence to several cola ; 
and there is here as elsewhere a variation in different sections. 

An essential of the Isocratic structure of sentences is the avoid- 
ance of hiatus. Kaelker, in the article several times referred to, 
has shown how studious Diodorus is in this matter. For example, 
he places a word in an unnatural position to avoid an hiatus, καὶ 
τοῦ Ῥηγίου καθορμισθέντες ἐγγύς, xiii 3, 5. 

A position like this last could not be due to rhythm, inasmuch 
as Diodorus is not strict as to rhythmical structure. He allows a 
heaping of long and short syllables, as the above shows. In this 
regard Ephorus, one of Diodorus’ chief sources, did not follow 
his own instructions to avoid such heaping, ef. frg. 76 and 107 
(Miller). Diodorus makes use of the paean and the dactyl, 
especially the latter, and occasionally parts of hexameters are 
found—a full one in xiii 107, 2, εὐθὺ yap οἱ μὲν τῶν Λακεδαι- 
μονίων βασιλεῖς ἾΑ-γις (the following words form the beginning 
of an hexameter); cf. xiii 2, 3. The endings of the cola are 
generally good, but occasionally iambic and hexameter endings are 
found: xii 53, 2; xiii 2,4; 12,5; 73, 3, besides other bad ones, 
as v—~v —~y~, xiii 39, 4. 

As to figures—the σχήματα réfews—we have those of our 
author collected in the two unfortunate—as far as their object is 


Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War, 41 


concerned—papers of W. Stern, one in the Comment. in hon. Οὐ, 
Studemund, Strassburg, 1889, pp. 147-162, the other, “ Diodor 
und Theopomp,” Durlach, 1891. The principal figures are given 
below, and details are to be sought in Stern’s papers. 

Diodorus is given to heaping A and O-sounds: xiv 1, 3; ii 4, 
4; 52, 9, θερμασίᾳ πήξασα, ξηρότητι δὲ πιλήσασα, φέγγει δὲ 
λαμπρύνασα. T-sounds are also employed in a similar way for 
effect of the sound: i 78, 1; v 34, 3, θάνατον τὸ πρόστιμον 
teOeixact ; xii 12,1; xiii 33, 2. 

In balanced sentences Diodorus takes delight, but good examples 
of Isocolon and Parison are rare. An example of Isocolon is xii 
11, 1, πρώτας μὲν τὰς πολιτίδας, ὑστέρας δὲ τὰς μεταγενεστέρας ; 
xi 11, 3; xiii 52, 4: of Parison, xii 78, 5, καὶ μόγις μετὰ πολλῆς 
δεήσεως TO ζῆν συνεχώρησαν, τὴν δ᾽ οὐσίαν αὐτῶν δημεύσαντες 
κατέσκαψαν τὰς οἰκίας ; xiii 2,6; 45,8; 99, 3. 

Examples of Paronomasia, of which Theopompus was very 
fond, are, xii 12, 2, ἐπιτυχόντος - - - ἀποτυχόντος ; 83, 6, 
κρατῆσαι - - - κρατίστην : xiii 45, 10, περιδεεῖς - - - περιχαρεῖς, 
ib. 95, 1, 3; xiv 46, 3; xvii 101, 6. 

Numerous are the examples of Homoeoteleuton : os, ii 19, 4; 
26, 9: ov, xiii 4, 1; 13, 3: ov, xii 62, 4: ov, x1 4,3; 79, 2: ous, 
xii 54, 2; 63, 5: wv, xii 55, 10; 68, 6: av, xviii 16, 3: ην, xiii 
37,5; 50,10: ef, xiii 70, 4; xiv 9, 4: ουντων ous, xii 66, 2, 
Chiastically arranged : πολλῆς ἀταχίας ἀναρχίας οὔσης, xiv 27, 
1; xiii 94, 2. 

The speech of Endius bristles with antitheses, xiii 52, 3-8. A 
good one-membered antithesis is xiii 48, 7, τοὺς μὲν δούλους 
ἐλευθέρους, τοὺς δὲ ξένους πολίτας. Good antitheses are rare, 
but see Stern, “ Diodor und Theopomp,” pp. 13-17. 

Diodorus makes much of Question in his speeches and his 
encomia: xi 46, 2; 59, 2: xiii 21,4; 22,1; 28, 2; 29,4: xiv 
65, 4. 


From the preceding study we find that Diodorus follows close 
on Polybius in syntax, and a constant observation of the vocabu- 
lary during the working out of this paper showed that in this 
respect also the two authors are very closely allied.. Outside of 
the parts of bks. xii and xiii that tell the story of the Pelopon- 


42 Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 


nesian War as far as Thucydides holds out, no influence of the 
great Athenian is apparent. Dionysius of Halicarnassus is much 
nearer the Attic standard, while New Testament Greek is greatly 
inferior to that of our author. 


PELOPONNESIAN WAR. 


As stated in the Introduction, a direct comparison of Diodorus’ 
account of the Peloponnesian War with its probable sources does 
not yield data sufficient to allow the drawing of conclusions. We 
shall now proceed to examine the account of that war as given by 
our author and show how it readily breaks into sections, evidence 
for more sources than one. Regard will be had for space, and so 
only the principal variations between the parts will be given. 
The portions of Diodorus to be under consideration are bk. xii 41 
to end; bk. xiii 1-19; 33-107 (the Sicilian and other history 
omitted). 'The speeches which occupy ce. 20-32 inclusive of bk. 
xiii are properly omitted on the ground of their not being neces- 
sary to the investigation. 3 


A few changes in vocabulary are interesting. After xiii 48 
διαγωνίξεσθαι is often used, very rarely before in the Pelopon- 
nesian War: xii 70, 2; xiii 40, 2. διαφθείρω, more often in 
Thucydides than in any other author (cf. Von Essen’s Index), 
appears frequently before xiii 42, 4, at which point Thucydides 
ceases ; and not afterwards. To be noticed also is that the διαφ- 
θείρω᾽Β of bk. xiii are, with the exception of ὁ. 13, 4, 5, lumped 
in the description of the last sea-fight before Syracuse, where there 
is great probability that Diodorus looked into his Thucydides, 
In bk. xiii ἐπιχειρεῖν holds sway completely, whereas previously 
ἐπιβάλλεσθαι had had a decided majority. θεωρῶ in the present 
participle is often used in bk. xiii; not found in bk. xii. In 
this last mentioned book τολμάω frequently occurs, but rarely 
afterwards. τολμάω is a favorite of Theopompus, Blass, Aft. 
Beredsamkeit, ii 419, 2nd ed.; but it is not at all likely that 
Diodorus drew this word from that author. Blass also gives as a 
characteristic of Theopompus a large use of εἰμί. This verb after 
xiii 42, 4 becomes twice as common as before. 


Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 43 


These few words, which are of such a nature as not to be 
affected by a change in the character of the subject-matter, point, 
indefinitely, it is true, towards three sections: xii 41 to end ; xiii 
1-42, 4; ib. 42, 4-107. A further test based on an examination 
of the syntax will give more accurate results. 


The apposition of πόλιες to the name of the town, while it is 
common in bk. xii, does not appear after this. 

As C. Schmidt, in his paper de articulo in nominibus propriis 
apud atticos scriptores pedestres, p. 29, observes that rapidity of 
movement prompts to the disuse of the article with proper names, 
so the stronger summarizing character of bk. xii, as compared 
with the first part of bk. xiii, causes a decrease by half in the 
number of articles; and for xiii 45 ff. the ratio is still less. These 
ratios are closely followed by the article with the names of the 
opposing forces in the first two sections just mentioned. Varia- 
tions in towns, islands and persons show themselves in accordance 
with the three sections. 


The demonstrative οὗτος is found some twenty-five times in bk. 
xii as οὗτος δέ, at the beginning of a sentence. This scarcely 
appears in the first part of xiii, mostly in cc. 36-42, 4. The 
remainder of xiii furnishes only a half dozen. Book xii has a 
number of epanaleptic obdros’s, which are almost wanting aftcr- 
wards. 


We have the adverbial accusatives τοῦτον τὸν τρόπον, τόνδε τὸν 
τρόπον, τὸν εἰρημένον τρόπον in bk. xii (41, 1; 70,1; 72,6; 74, 
6; 79, 7); only once in bk. xiii, c. 45, 8, τοῦτον τὸν τρόπον, with 
ἀνδραπόδων τρόπον οἵ 15, 2. 

On the whole, the aorist preponderates over the imperfect. This 
preponderance is, however, much greater in xii than in xiii, as 
may be seen in ἄγω, ἀπάγω, ἀθροίζω, διαλέγομαι, κατέχω, Tapa- 
σκευάζω and πλέω, which last usually has the aorist, but the 
imperfect is found in xii 49, 4: xiii 15,3; 45,3; 50,3; 68, 2; 
72,2. The relatively greater compass of the narrative after xiii 
42, 4 may be seen in the description of battles. The battle of 
Mantinea (xii 79, 4—7) covers one page, whereas the battle in xiii 
45-46 occupies three pages, cf. cc. 50-51; 97 ff. 


44 Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 


There are in bk. xii only two final sentences (50, 3; 61, 3), 
while after 42, 4 bk. xiii furnishes eight. The first nineteen 
chapters of this book have one final sentence ; ec. 33-42, 4, five. 

In bk. xiii verbs of fear are followed always by μήποτε, in xii 
mostly by μή. 


ὥστε is followed by the infinitive, mostly the aorist, in bk. xii, 
the present in xiii 1-19; but the remainder of this latter book has 
a majority of presents among the infinitives, and also two indica- 
tives. The correlative of ὥστε in the twelfth book is τηλικοῦτος 
in c. 59, 2 and οὕτως in 58, 2, the correlative being elsewhere 
τοσοῦτος. In xiii 45-107 οὕτως is the correlative, τοσοῦτος and 
τηλικοῦτος Once each. 


ἐπειδή and ὁπότε are lacking in bk. xii. The former appears 
in xiii at 10, 4 and 45,1; 50,3; 76,1; the latter at xiii 40, 1; 
45,9; 45,1; 46,1. The temporal sentences of xiii 45-107 are 
far in excess of those in the portions preceding. 

Local sentences are found at xiii 41,6; 50,4; 51, 7; 106, 5; 
but in no other part of the narrative. 

Relatively speaking, there are three times as many relative sen- 
tences in bk. xiii as in bk. xii. 


The conditional sentences of bk. xii—four in number—all have 
éav. There is a variety in the conditions of bk. xiii, three with 
ἐάν, two with ἄν, two with εἰ and optative, and one unreal condi- 
tion. 


As to the articular infinitive, there are sixteen in bk. xii, twelve 
and twenty-one in the two parts of bk. xiii. Again, of those of 
bk. xii eleven are διὰ τό᾽ 5, double those of bk. xiii, and the tense 
of this last is mainly the present, whereas the majority of dca τό 8 
in xii have perfects (cf. Foresmann, de infin. temporum usu Thuc., 
Curt. Stud., vi 82, a large number of perfects in Thue., especially 
bks. ii-iv). The five remaining art. infins. of xii are accusatives, 
except περὶ τοῦ ; those of the parts of xiii are genitives, nomina- 
tives, accusatives, and seven prepositions. 


Inasmuch as it is hard to detect the source of a preposition or a 


f 


Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 45 


particle, much stress is laid upon these in the search for sources. 
Then, too, the adoption of them from the source is often uncon- 
scious, so the testimony borne by them is weighty. | 

"Amo. Used with persons in xii and the first section of xiii, 
but not with persons in the second part of xiii. 

Ἔπί. c. acc. in expressions of time, once in xii and often after- 
wards. The same is true of ἐπί c. local dative. ἐπὶ δὲ τούτων at 
the beginning of each year after the names of archons and consuls 
is found up to xiii 34, 1; not after this point. 

Κατά. τὰ κατά ο. ace. of a country is common in xii and the 
first part of xiii, and only twice in the last section. 

᾿ Μετά. μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα occurs one-fourth as often in xiii 45-107 
as previously. 

Μέχρι. The phrase μέχρι τινός, temporal, occurs a number of 
times in the last part of xiii, not before, though its absence is not 
due to a lack of μέχρι. 

Παρά. Not used locally in xii, but it is often afterwards found 
in this use. 

Περί. The phrase οἱ περί c. acc. of a person is distributed in 
the same way as the παρά just mentioned. 

Πρό. Used locally only in xiii. 

Πρός. The phrase πρὸς δὲ τούτοις appears in xii and xiii 1-42, 
4; πρός ο. dat. local. is found once in xii, and a deal of times in 


bk. xiii. 


The following particles show variations in the three sections. 

“Apa. Only ἅμα δὲ καί in the first part of bk. xiii, at 16, 5. 
Both the latter part of this book and bk. xii have several com- 
binations. As a preposition, bk. xii shows only ἅμα δὲ τούτοις 
πραττομένοις, whereas this phrase is not found afterwards, though 
ἅμα is used with other words. 

Διὸ καί. There are eighteen διὸ «ai’s in bk. xii, four in the 
first section of bk. xiii, and twice after c. 42, 4. 

Ἤδη. Once in bk. xii, four times in xiii 1-42, 4, after which it 
does not again appear. 

Kai and te. τε - - - καί offers relatively three times as many 
examples in the first part of xiii as in the second part, and twice 
as many as in bk. xii. There are six te-solitaria in the book just 
mentioned, one in ΧΙ]. 


46 Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 


Μέν. The latter part of xiii makes greater use of μέν - - - δέ 
than the preceding sections in nearly the ratio 3:2. The τὸ μὲν 
πρῶτον - - - μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα of xii is replaced in xiii 45-107 by τὸ 
μὲν πρῶτον - - - δέ. 


In regard to sentence formation, we find that the sentences of 
xii are on the whole shorter and have less variety than those of 
the following book, especially in the latter part. Here are more 
antitheses, parisa, isocola, paronomasia, and homoeotoleuta than in 
the twelfth book. 


The latter part of the Peloponnesian War fills relatively about 
twice as much space as the narrative of the portion preceding the 
Sicilian invasion. This may be readily seen in description of 
battles, which are much longer in xiii 45-107, as already observed. 
Again, six and a half years of the war are narrated in this section, 
or about one-half the number of years in the first, though the 
space in each is very near the same. 

From xii 41 to xii 83, 6 there is not a trace of a speech. In 
xii 83, 6 is the abstract of a speech of Nicias; his letter in brief in 
xiii 8, 6; and his exhortations to his soldiers, ib. 15, 2. After this 
Diodorus gives reproaches uttered by Athenians and Syracusans, 
ib. 17, 1, which, as well as the preceding, are in oratio obliqua. 
Omitting the speeches of Nicolaus and Gylippus, the latter part of 
xiii contains the speech of Endius (52, 3-8), of Callicratidas (98, 
1) and of Diomedes (102, 2), all in oratio recta. 


With this we may end the discussion of the variations between 
the different sections of the Peloponnesian War. That there are 
three sections has been clearly shown. The first extends from xii 
41 to xii 82, 3 rather than to the end of the book, inasmuch as 
the Sicilian War begins at this point and in 82, 6 is the abstract 
of Nicias’ speech, and the insertion of this makes the end of the 
book similar in character to the first part of the following book. 
The second section would then be xii 82, 3—xiii 42, 4. But, again, 
a section should be made of cc. 36-42, 4; ef. final sentences and 
demonstrative pronouns, This would be a third section. And the 
fourth would be xiii 45-107. 


Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. AT 


Sources. Much detail that might have been given has been — 
omitted ; but it has been clearly shown that Diodorus’ narrative 
of the Peloponnesian War breaks into four sections. Hence, it is 
scarcely credible that the narrative was drawn from one source, 
unless that source was itself a variegated patchwork, and this does 
not appear to have been the condition of Ephorus, the generally 
accepted source. ‘The testimony concerning him does not point to 
this. That he wrote ‘topically’ is against it. To show then that 
there are four sections in the narrative is to show that Diodorus 
made use of some other historian as well as of Ephorus. 

As Collmann, de Diodori Siculi fontibus, Marburgi, 1869, p. 16, 
has observed, the first section of the narrative, xii 41-82, 3, is 
much closer to Thucydides than is the portion of the war from xii 
82, 3 to xili 42, 4, though Collmann says that it is due to the 
closer following of Thucydides by Diodorus’ source. Here lies 
the difficulty, to distinguish between the true Thucydides and 
Thucydides as seen through Ephorus. The difficulty is, moreover, 
enhanced by the loss of this latter writer’s work, in consequence 
of which loss he is much prized by those who seek after sources. 

To see whether the material obtained in studying the different 
sections would be of use in determining the question of the source 
of the first section, we shall examine its peculiarities as above 
determined. We consider them first with reference to Thucydides, 

διαφθείρω, often used in the first section, is a word of which 
Thucydides is fund, as is seen in the 152 occurrences given by 
Von Essen. Thucydides also likes the local κατά, for his κατά 8 
of the second book are one-fifth local. In διὰ τό ec. infin. Thucy- 
dides ‘riots’ (A. J. P., 1. 4.), and this is frequently found in the 
section of Diodorus-under consideration. The perfect tenses after 
διὰ τό are in both unusually abundant. e-solitarium is an ear- 
mark of Thucydides, and we have seen that there are six such Te’s 
in the first section and one afterwards. To these few signs of 
Thucydides we may add the phrases εἰς τὰς ᾿Αθήνας and ἐκ τῶν 
᾿Αθηνῶν, which have the article in our section and almost exclu-_ 
sively in Thucydides, whereas the following sections omit it. 
Καλούμενος with cities and peoples is almost confined to the first 
section ; as, τὴν καλουμένην ᾿Ακτήν, 43,1; τὸ Ῥίον καλούμενον, 


48,1. It is often employed by Thucydides, ii 25, 3, τὸν ᾿Ιχθῦν 


48 Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 


καλούμενον, an order common to both authors; ib. 17, 1; 23, 3; 
55, 1. | 

On comparing these likenesses between Thucydides and Dio- 
dorus with what can be learned from the fragments of Ephorus, 
they remain unchanged, except that Ephorus occasionally employs 
re-solitarium, οἵ, Diod., xii 40, 4. Ephorus and Theopompus are 
both classed under the yAadupa καὶ ἀνθηρὰ ἁρμονία by Dionysius 
Hal., de comp. verb. xxiii, but, unlike the latter, Ephorus has no 
strongly distinctive marks. A study of his fragments has been 
made by Blass, -Att. Beredsamkeit, ii 427-441. The use of svnony- 
mous words in pairs is one of the marks of Ephorus, which is, 
however, common in late Greek. Though Diodorus is fond of 
pairing, yet it cannot be held that he has in this a sign of 
Ephorus’ influence. Nor was there found any certain linguistic 
trace of Ephorus. 

There is one variation in the first section that is of much 
importance, inasmuch as from it we can prove the direct use of 
Thucydides. This is the omission of speeches. In ὁ. 47, 1 we 
find that the Lacedaemonians had sent out a force under Archi- 
damus, who had encamped before Plataea, and, says Diodorus, 
μελλόντων δ᾽ αὐτῶν δηοῦν τὴν χώραν, Kal παρακαλούντων τοὺς 
Πλαταιεῖς ἀποστῆναι τῶν ᾿Αθηναίων, ὡς οὐ προσεῖχον αὐτοῖς, 
ἐπόρθησε τὴν χώραν καὶ τὰς κατ᾽ αὐτὴν κτήσεις ἐλυμήνατο. 
Beginning with a gen. 8050]. as he is wont to do, Diodorus was 
made forgetful afterwards that he began with μελλόντων through 
the phrase ὡς οὐ προσεῖχον. If we turn to Thucydides, ii 71, 1, 
ἡγεῖτο δὲ ᾿Αρχίδαμος ὁ Ζευξιδάμου, Λακεδαιμονίων βασιλεύς * 
καὶ καθίσας τὸν στρατὸν ἔμελλε δῃώσειν τὴν γῆν " οἱ δὲ ΤΠ λαταιῆς 
εὐθὺς πρέσβεις πέμψαντες πρὸς αὐτὸν ἔλεγον τάδε, we get our 
sentence to ws. The end of the sentence, from ἐπόρθησε, came 
from the words of Thucydides in ὁ. 75, 1, at the close of the 
negotiations between Archidamus and the Plataeans. Diodorus 
avoided the speeches and so fell into a confusion, as this sentence 
shows. It does not appear to me credible that the above sentence 
could have been written, if Diodorus was using Ephorus. All 
other speeches of the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th books of Thucydides are 
similarly evaded. Thucydides was hard reading to the Greek of 
Diodorus’ time, as the criticisms of Dion. Hal. show; but it does 


Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 49 


not appear that the speeches were avoided merely on this 
account. 

The two speeches of Nicolaus and Gylippus are also indications 
that Diodorus knew something of Thucydides. Beyond abstracts 
of a few speeches there is nothing of this kind of composition till 
the very point at which speeches cease in Thucydides. Then, and 
not till then, Diodorus inserts two lengthy ones, as in rivalry of 
his great predecessor, though Bachof, Timaios als Quelle Diodors 
f. d. Reden i. B. 13 u. 14, Jahrb. 129, 445-478, has tried to prove 
that they are taken from Timaeus. But to write in rivalry of the 
great men of the past is a well-known practice of the later Greeks, 
These late Greeks, moreover, reworked that which they emulated. 
By a beautiful rhetorical surprise, Nicolaus defends the Athenians, 
and he does it with arguments borrowed almost entirely from the 
speech of Diodotus in defence of the Mytileneans, Thue. iii 42-48. 
The situation is the same in both. Diodotus and Nicolaus both 
say that they will discuss the question from the point of τὸ cupdé- 
pov, Thue. iii 42, 48; Diod. xiii 20, 5. Diodotus insists that those 
who strive after the hegemony should be lenient towards those in 
their power, Thue. iii 47, and this is enlarged upon by Nicolaus, 
xiii 21. The one argues that injury to the Mytileneans is injury 
to Athens, Thue. iii 46, the other repeats the argument in reference 
to the captured Athenians. ach insists that it is wrong to pass 
judgment on the persons on trial in a body, Thue. iii 48; Diod. 
xiii 27. Every argument of Diodotus except that of c. 45 is 
reproduced by Nicolaus. But strong as this imitation is for a 
direct use of Thucydides, equally strong is the reproduction of the 
man Diodotus in the man Nicolaus. Neither are known in any 
other connection, and both are types of the citizen who counsels 
prudence. 

From these considerations and from the linguistic proofs it is 
evident that Diodorus made use of Thucydides, and that the 2nd, 
3rd, 4th, 5th books of this author formed the basis, with Ephorus, 
of the first section of our author’s narrative of the Peloponnesian 


War. 


The sources of the remaining sections of the war cannot be 
traced as in the case of the first. Philistus, Ephorus and Timaeus 


50 Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 


exist only in fragments, so that the direct linguistic evidence for 
which we are now seeking cannot be obtained. Though there 
are traces of Thucydides, there is no linguistic proof that he was 
directly used. What has been said concerning the speeches of 
Nicolaus and Gylippus implies the use of him before these. 

The third section came in all probability from Ephorus, as it 
contains a quotation from him and agrees linguistically more 
closely with the following section than with either of the pre- 
ceding. M. Biidinger believes that in this section we have excerpts 
from Thucydides, D. Universalhistorie i. Alterthume, Wien, 1895, 
p. 159; but the agreeing of the two in the matter of a few words 
is not proof that Thucydides was used. Linguistically considered 
no part of this section can be assigned to Thucydides. 

Xenophon, Ephorus and Theopompus may, one, or all, have 
furnished Diodorus with the material for the last section of the 
war, xiii 45-107. Xenophon, it is agreed, did not contribute any- 
thing, Volquardsen, 1. c., pp. 43-47 ; Wachsmuth, 1]. c., 101. In 
regard to the other two, the opinion of the majority of investi- 
gators is in favor of Ephorus as the source. Because of the greater 
rhetorical character of this section, Holm (History of Greece, Eng. 
trans., ii 508), following Breitenbach, assigns it to Theopompus. 
Prof. Freeman thinks that previously Diodorus had been over- 
awed by Thucydides and that, now released from this influence, 
he rises to a higher level, History of Sicily, iii 437 N.1. But he 
grants more to Diodorus himself and does not speak of any source. 
᾿ς Theopompus was a forceful writer, and certain traits of style 
can be made out from his fragments, Blass, Att. Bered., ii 419 ff. 
(2nd ed.), Examining xiii 45-107 for the characteristics indicated 
by Blass, we find that verbs of circumlocution, εἶναι, τυγχάνειν, 
φαίνεσθαι, ὁρᾶσθαι, ἀξιοῦν, τολμᾶν, are not used more than usual; 
that there are no powerful and studied words and turns of expression 
that need be assigned to Theopompus; that eaclamatory questions 
are wanting; that climaa is scarcely noticeable; and that synony- 
mous words in three’s are not to be found. 

On the other hand, the linguistic evidence favors Ephorus, 
inasmuch as it shows that this section is very similar to the begin- 
ning of the eleventh book, which without doubt is derived from 
Ephorus. Likenesses are found in vocabulary and in syntax; as, 


Diodorus and the Peloponnesian War. 51 


freer use of artic. infin. and of subordinate sentence, ἐπί in expres- 
sions of time, of περί τινα, and μέχρι τινός ; but the portion of 
book xiii surpasses that of book xi in rhetorical fullness. 
This section, then, we would give to Ephorus. 

Γ᾿ 

_ We have now reached the end of this paper. In it we have set 

forth the language and style of Diodorus, and we have examined 
linguistically the narrative of the Peloponnesian War, in which 
we have shown that the language of our author may be employed 
in the investigation of his sources. We have found that there are 
four parts to the narrative, and hence no single source. The first 
part comes from Thucydides and another source, Ephorus; no 
satisfactory linguistic evidence was found for the source of the 
second ; Ephorus was pronounced the source of the third and 
fourth. 


nah . fr ae Φ a8 
4 ® 


: ait ace © eubatg boy 
. ᾿ ig Get, hy sh 
Ge 


ars 
one 


FOURTEEN DAY USE _ 
TURN TO DESK FROM WHICH BORROWED 


This book is due on the last date stamped below, or 
on the date to which renewed. 


Renewed books are subject to immediate recall. 


29 0ct'55L7 


LD 21-100m-2,’55 
(B139s22)476 


a 


GAYLAMOUNT 
PAMPHLET BINDER | 


{ 


Fd 
Manufactured by 
GAYLORD BROS. Inc. 


Syracuse, N.Y. 


ockton, Calif. 


St 
EA LOR ee Ν 


ἀξ τς 


ray 


